Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 114

CEMP-EC/ Department of the Army EP 715-1-7

CECW-EP/ U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

Washington, DC 20314-1000
31 May 1999
Engineer Pamphlet


Distribution Restriction Statement

Approved for public release; distribution is
CECW-EP U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
CEPR-P Washington, DC 20314-1000

No. 715-1-7 31 May 1999



Paragraph Page

Purpose 1-1 1-1

Applicability 1-2 1-1
References 1-3 1-1
Distribution 1-4 1-1
Acronyms 1-5 1-1
Scope 1-6 1-1
Background 1-7 1-1
Responsibilities 1-8 1-2
Training 1-9 1-2
Internet Addresses 1-10 1-2


Principles 2-1 2-1

Responsibilities 2-2 2-1
Definition of A-E Services 2-3 2-1
General Considerations 2-4 2-1
Small Business Considerations 2-5 2-1
Acquisition Strategies and Plans 2-6 2-1
Contract Types 2-7 2-2
Selection of Contract Type 2-8 2-3
A-E Contracting Process 2-9 2-3
Time Standards 2-10 2-3
Streamlining Techniques 2-11 2-3


Principles 3-1 3-1

General 3-2 3-1
Responsibilities 3-3 3-1
CBD Synopsis 3-4 3-1
ACASS 3-5 3-2
EP 715-1-7
31 May 99

Paragraph Page
Board Membership 3-6 3-3
Selection Criteria 3-7 3-3
General Procedures for Evaluation Boards 3-8 3-6
Preselection Board 3-9 3-6
Selection Board 3-10 3-7
Approval of Selections 3-11 3-8
Notifications 3-12 3-8
Debriefings 3-13 3-8
Disposition of SFs 254 and 255 3-14 3-9
Special Cases 3-15 3-9
EP 715-1-4 3-16 3-10


Principles 4-1 4-1

Responsibilities 4-2 4-1
Regulatory Basis 4-3 4-1
Negotiation Team 4-4 4-1
Statement of Work 4-5 4-1
Request for Price Proposal 4-6 4-2
Preproposal Conference 4-7 4-2
Partnering 4-8 4-2
Service Contract Act 4-9 4-2
Independent Government Estimate 4-10 4-3
Fact-Finding Sessions 4-11 4-3
Proposal Analysis and Prenegotiation Objectives 4-12 4-3
Negotiation of FFP Contracts 4-13 4-3
Negotiation of ID Contracts 4-14 4-5
Subcontracting Plan 4-15 4-6
Price Negotiation Memorandum 4-16 4-6
Preaward Survey 4-17 4-6
Contract Preparation and Award 4-18 4-7
Task Order Issuance 4-19 4-7
NAF Contracts 4-20 4-7


Introduction 5-1 5-1

Principles 5-2 5-1
General 5-3 5-11
Contracting Officers Representative 5-4 5-1
Quality Management 5-5 5-2
ID Contracts 5-6 5-2
Payments 5-7 5-2
Subcontract Reporting 5-8 5-3
Resolving Performance Problems 5-9 5-3
Contract Closeout 5-10 5-3

EP 715-1-7
31 May 99

Paragraph Page

Principles 6-1 6-1

Responsibilities 6-2 6-1
Regulatory Background 6-3 6-1
General Procedures 6-4 6-1
Monitoring Performance 6-5 6-3
Interim Evaluations 6-6 6-3
Evaluation of A-E Performance after Completion of 6-7 6-3
Design or Engineering Services
Evaluation of A-E Performance after Completion of 6-8 6-4
Approval, Distribution and Revision of Evaluations 6-9 6-4
Marginal and Unsatisfactory Performance 6-10 6-5


Introduction 7-1 7-1

Principles 7-2 7-1
Responsibilities 7-3 7-1
Legal and Regulatory Background 7-4 7-2
Implementation 7-5 7-3
Funding 7-6 7-3
Notification, Investigation and Recovery Procedures 7-7 7-4
A-E Performance Evaluation and Contract Closeout 7-8 7-7
Reporting 7-9 7-7













EP 715-1-7
31 May 99




















EP 715-1-7
31 May 99


1-1. Purpose. Contracting.

a. This pamphlet provides guidance and e. Engineer Regulation (ER) 5-1-11,

procedures for contracting for architect-engineer Program and Project Management.
(A-E) services in accordance with the Brooks
Architect-Engineer Act and the acquisition f. ER 1110-1-12, Engineering and Design
regulations referenced below. The guidance and Quality Management.
procedures in this pamphlet are intended to
promote fair, efficient and consistent A-E g. ER 1110-1-8152, Professional
contracting practices throughout the U.S. Army Registration.
Corps of Engineers (USACE).
h. ER 1110-345-721, Architect-Engineer
b. Compliance with this pamphlet is Selection and Design Procedures for Medical
required by EFARS 36.601-3 (S-101). Adherence Facilities.
to the guidance and procedures herein will ensure
proper compliance with the acquisition regulations, i. ER 1180-1-9, Design-Build Contracting.
and any variations therefrom must be documented
in the contract file (provided the variations do not j. Engineer Pamphlet (EP) 715-1-4,
violate the acquisition regulations). Architect-Engineer Contracts: How to Obtain
Consideration for Architect-Engineer Contracts with
c. This pamphlet provides guidance and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
procedures for implementing certain key portions
of the acquisition regulations relevant to A-E k. Engineer Manual (EM) 1110-1-1000,
contracting. However, it is not intended to cover Photogrammetric Mapping.
all aspects of the A-E contracting process and
should not be used as a substitute for the current l. Technical Report CADD-96-1, Estimating
acquisition regulations (the FAR system) which Costs for Architect-Engineer (A-E) Computer-Aided
provide procurement policy. If a conflict arises Design and Drafting (CADD) Services, Tri-Service
between this pamphlet and the acquisition CADD/GIS Technology Center.
regulations, the acquisition regulations govern.
m. Tri-Service Standards, Parts 1.1 and 1.2,
1-2. Applicability. This pamphlet applies to all A-E CADD and GIS Deliverables Standards.
USACE commands specifically authorized to
procure A-E services, and to all USACE programs. 1-4. Distribution. Approved for public release.
Distribution is unlimited.
1-3. References.
1-5. Acronyms. Appendix A contains a list of
a. Brooks Architect-Engineer Act; Public acronyms used in this pamphlet.
Law 92-582, as amended; 40 United States Code
(U.S.C.) 541-544. 1-6. Scope. This pamphlet is generally applicable
to all types of A-E contracts. However, certain
b. Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) and aspects of Chapter 4 on price negotiation and
the Defense (DFARS), Army (AFARS) and Corps of Chapter 5 on contract administration are not
Engineers (EFARS) supplements thereto. relevant to cost-reimbursement (CR) contracts. See
FAR 15.4, 16.3, 16.4, 31, 32 and 42 for specific
c. Army Regulation (AR) 25-55, The guidance on CR contracts.
Department of the Army Freedom of Information
Act Program. 1-7. Background. The Brooks A-E Act defines
A-E services and specifies the Federal policy for
d. AR 215-4, Nonappropriated Fund procuring A-E services. The Brooks A-E Act

EP 715-1-7
31 May 99

requires the public announcement of requirements (2) Supports the PARC in monitoring the
for A-E services, selection of the most highly compliance of USACE commands with A-E
qualified firms based on demonstrated competence procurement regulations and this pamphlet through
and professional qualifications, and the negotiation staff assistance visits, automated and special
of a fair and reasonable price. FAR Part 36, and reports, informal coordination, conferences and
the supplements thereto, implement the Brooks A-E other appropriate methods.
d. The Cost and Systems Engineering
1-8. Responsibilities. Branch, Engineering and Construction Division,
Directorate of Military Programs, HQUSACE (CEMP-
a. Commanders should regularly evaluate EE) is the proponent of the Architect-Engineer
the A-E contracting process in their command to Contract Administration Support System (ACASS)
ensure it is efficient and effective. Appendices B and is responsible for ACASS policy and general
and C are checklists that may be used for this management oversight. This office is also the
purpose. principal interface on ACASS with other Federal
b. The Principal Assistant Responsible for
Contracting (PARC), Headquarters USACE e. The Contracting Division, Portland
(HQUSACE) (CEPR-ZA): District (CENWP-CT) is responsible for operation
and maintenance of ACASS in accordance with
(1) Is the senior staff official responsible for HQUSACE policy and direction. CENWP-CT will
execution, oversight and administration of the issue instructions on ACASS and respond to
contracting function. inquiries from users and A-E firms.

(2) Carries out delegable authorities of the 1-9. Training. The following USACE Proponent
Head of the Contracting Authority as described in Sponsored Engineer Corps Training (PROSPECT)
the FAR, DFARS and AFARS. courses provide valuable training regarding A-E
contracting. The course number and proponent
c. The Construction Policy Branch, office are shown in parentheses.
Engineering and Construction Division, Directorate
of Military Programs, HQUSACE (CEMP-EC): a. Architect-Engineer Contracting (004,
(1) Is responsible for USACE technical
guidance and procedures for A-E contracting, b. ACASS/CCASS (174, CEMP-EE).
including maintenance of this pamphlet. CEMP-EC,
in coordination with the PARC and other HQUSACE c. Engineering and Design Quality
elements, will identify and implement regulatory and Management (208, CEMP-EC).
procedural changes to improve the A-E contracting
process throughout USACE. 1-10. Internet Addresses. Appendix D is a list of
useful Internet addresses pertinent to A-E
contracting, and contracting in general.

EP 715-1-7
31 May 99


2-1. Principles. should typically be procured as A-E services. A

design-build contract is procured as a construction
a. Proposed contracts for A-E services will contract in accordance with FAR Part 36, and not
be structured to maximize competition, provide as an A-E contract, since the A-E services are a
contract opportunities for many firms, and minor part of a design-build contract. Similarly, a
maximize small business (SB) and small Total Environmental Restoration Contract (TERC) is
disadvantaged business (SDB) participation, while procured as a service contract under the source
satisfying the needs of the Government in the most selection procedures in FAR 15.3, and not as an
effective, economical, and timely manner. A-E contract, since the A-E services are a minor
part of a TERC contract.
b. Acquisition planning for A-E services will
be a team effort among technical, contracting, 2-4. General Considerations. See FAR Part 7 and
project management, and other appropriate the supplements thereto for general requirements
personnel, including the Deputy for Small Business for acquisition planning, and EFARS 36.601-3-90
(DSB). for specific requirements for A-E ID contracts.
Thorough acquisition planning (informal or formal)
2-2. Responsibilities. will determine the nature, type, scope and number
of contracts required for a project or program,
a. General. The Chief of Engineering1, the including contracts for A-E services. Acquisition
Deputy for Programs and Project Management planning will consider the nature, complexity and
(DPM), the Chief of Contracting, the DSB, and other dollar value of the anticipated work; schedule and
functional elements as appropriate, in each urgency; budget and funding stream; industry
operating command (center, district or laboratory) capabilities; and small business opportunities.
having A-E contracting authority are responsible for Unrelated or dissimilar work shall not be bundled in
acquisition planning for A-E services. the same contract.

b. Time Standards. Commanders should 2-5. Small Business Considerations. As required

regularly review the A-E contracting process in their by EFARS 19.201(c)(9)(B), each proposed synopsis
command to ensure that A-E contracts and task for A-E services shall be coordinated with the DSB.
orders (issued under indefinite delivery (ID) The DSB will review the acquisition for possible set-
contracts) are procured in accordance with the time aside for SB, emerging SB (ESB) or the Small
standards in paragraph 2-10 to the maximum extent Business Administration's (SBA) 8a Program in
possible. accordance with current laws and regulations. The
DSB will document the review using DD Form
2-3. Definition of A-E Services. A-E services are 2579. If a contract is not set-aside, it will still be
defined in FAR 36.102 and 36.601-4. Appendix E structured to maximize the opportunities for SB and
provides guidance to assist the contracting officer SDB to compete. For example: unrelated
(KO) in determining if a particular contract should requirements will not be bundled into one contract;
be procured as A-E services in accordance with the scope and geographic area of an ID contract
FAR Subpart 36.6. Appendix F provides further will not be unduly broad; the monetary limits of an
guidance on which types of environmental services ID contract will be set at the lowest reasonable
levels; and overly restrictive technical requirements
will not be included.
Engineering Division and Chief of
Engineering (or Chief, Engineering Division) is 2-6. Acquisition Strategies and Plans.
Appropriate acquisition planning must be performed
used generically in this EP to refer to the division
and its chief responsible for the engineering for each A-E contract. An informal acquisition
function at a district or center. Likewise for strategy is suitable for most contracts (see EFARS
Construction Division and Chief of Construction7.103 and 36.601-3-90(b)). The requirements for
(or Chief, Construction Division) formal acquisition plans are contained in DFARS

EP 715-1-7
31 May 99

207.103, AFARS 7.103 and EFARS 7.103. A reasonable degree of confidence. A LH contract or
formal acquisition plan must follow the format in task order might be appropriate for work such as
FAR 7.105 and be approved by the PARC. dredging payment surveys where the duration of
Acquisition strategies and plans must be fully the survey work is dependent on the progress of
coordinated among the concerned functional the dredging contractor and is not within the direct
elements. Acquisition planning for a construction control of the survey contractor.
project must include both the design and
construction phases, and be performed prior to the e. Indefinite-Delivery Contracts. ID
solicitation of an A-E contract, in order to allow thecontracts are the predominant contract type used
consideration of design-bid-build, design-build (see for A-E services in USACE. ID contracts must
ER 1180-1-9) and other delivery methods. comply with FAR 16.5, and EFARS 16.5 and
36.601-3-90. ID contracts are generally used for
2-7. Contract Types. recurring types of A-E services where procurement
of these services individually by normal
a. General. The KO is responsible for announcement, selection, negotiation and award
selecting the appropriate contract type in procedures would not be economical or timely.
coordination with technical, contracting and legal Task orders for particular projects are negotiated
specialists. FAR Subpart 16.1 provides general and issued under the terms and conditions of the ID
policies and guidance on selecting contract type. contract. Task order may be FP, CR or LH, as
allowed by the ID contract.
b. Firm-Fixed-Price (FFP) Contract. A FFP
contract (FAR 16.202) is appropriate when the f. Letter Contracts. A letter contract (FAR
statement of work (SOW) can be well defined and 16.603) is a preliminary contractual instrument that
there is sufficient time to announce, select, authorizes a contractor to begin work immediately.
negotiate and award a contract. A FFP contract A definitive contract must then be negotiated within
minimizes the Government's risk and administrative the time periods prescribed in FAR 16.603-2. It is
burden. Other types of fixed-price (FP) contracts appropriate for urgent requirements when there is
may be appropriate at times (see FAR 16.2). not sufficient time to follow the normal A-E
negotiation and award process. The use of a letter
c. Cost-Reimbursement Contract. A CR contract must be approved by CEPR-ZA in
contract (FAR 16.3) is used when uncertainties in accordance with FAR 16.603-3 and DFARS
the SOW do not permit costs to be estimated with 216.603-3 and 217.74, except USACE Division
sufficient accuracy to use a FP contract. A CR Commanders can approve letter contracts not
contract shall not be used as a substitute for exceeding $3,000,000 for emergencies in
developing a detailed SOW or allowing adequate accordance with EFARS 16.603-3 and 17.7404-1
procurement lead time. The most common CR (S-100).
contract types used for A-E services in USACE are
cost-plus-award-fee (CPAF; FAR 16.305) where the g. Simplified Acquisition Procedures.
contractors fee (same as profit in a FP contract) is
dependent on certain performance criteria, and (1) Purchase Orders. Purchase orders (FAR
cost-plus-fixed-fee (CPFF) where the contractor 13.302) are an expedient method for purchasing
receives a fixed fee, independent of actual costs.services that do not exceed the simplified
acquisition threshold (SAT), which is currently
d. Labor-Hour (LH) Contracts. A LH $100,000 (FAR 2.101). Announcement and
contract or task order (FAR 16.601 and 16.602) selection procedures are described in paragraph 3-
compensates the contractor for actual hours 15.a. Purchase orders are almost always
worked at predetermined rates. This contract type negotiated as FFP.
does not provide a financial incentive for a
contractor to perform efficiently, and hence, is one (2) Credit Card. A-E services which do not
of the least preferred contract types. Somewhat exceed the micro-purchase threshold of $2,500
similar to a CR contract, a LH contract may be may be procured using the Government credit card
applicable when the extent or duration of work or as described in paragraph 3-15.a(4).
anticipated costs can not be estimated with any

EP 715-1-7
31 May 99

2-8. Selection of Contract Type. Selection of the publication of the Commerce Business Daily (CBD)
appropriate A-E contract type generally depends on synopsis. The typical durations of the activities
the following factors (also see FAR 16.104): required to award an A-E contract are shown in
Appendix H.
a. Scope Certainty. Use a FFP contract,
task order, or purchase order if the scope can be (2) Task orders should typically be issued
defined and the level of effort reasonably estimated. within 37 calendar days, measured from issue of
If not, use a CR contract or task order. As a last the Request for Price Proposal (RFPP) to the
resort, use a LH contract or task order. appropriate ID contractor. The typical durations of
the activities required to issue a task order under an
b. Nature and Size of Work. Consider first ID contract are shown in Appendix H.
a task order if the required services are within the
scope and size limitations of an available ID (3) Task orders for outside customers, such
contract. Or, consider using a contract awarded as Army installations, where the scope preparation
through the advance selection process (see and negotiations were done by the customer,
paragraph 3-15.h) if the required services are within should typically be issued by USACE in 6 calendar
the type of work and size limitations of that days, measured from receipt of proper negotiation
selection. If neither of these methods are suitable, documentation and funding from the customer.
initiate a new announcement and selection process. The relevant contracting activities and durations are
shown in Appendix H.
c. Schedule. A separate contract should be
procured for a moderate or large project whenever (4) Contracts and task orders should be
possible. Consider a credit card purchase or awarded in less time if needed to meet critical
purchase order for a very small project. Consider a customer requirements. Similarly, longer durations
task order for a time-sensitive, small or moderate may be appropriate for certain contracts and task
size project. Consider using a contract awarded orders, such as ID contracts for USACE use or for
through the advance selection process for a time- complex and/or very large contracts and task
sensitive project of the appropriate type and size. orders.
Consider limited competition (FAR 6.3) and/or a
letter contract in the most urgent circumstances. c. Justifiable Delays. The above standards
exclude justifiable delays beyond the reasonable
2-9. A-E Contracting Process. Appendix G is a control of a USACE command, such as: scope
generic network of the A-E contracting process in uncertainties, delay in receiving funds, deferral or
USACE based on the pertinent acquisition suspension of a project by a customer or higher
regulations. authority, unsuccessful negotiations with the
highest qualified firm, delaying the award of an ID
2-10. Time Standards. contract for a reasonable period to coincide with
issuance of the first task order, or a protest. Also,
a. General. Prompt procurement of A-E additional time would be required if an audit is
services is essential to properly serve USACE considered necessary to determine a fair and
customers. Prolonged contracting causes delays in reasonable price.
project milestones, untimely obligation of funds,
increased costs and is unfair to A-E firms. For 2-11. Streamlining Techniques. Appendix I
these reasons, realistic time standards have been provides some suggested techniques for
established for awarding A-E contracts and issuing streamlining A-E contracting. The timely award of
A-E task orders in USACE. These standards should A-E contracts and task orders is largely within the
be followed to the maximum extent possible. direct control of each USACE command, and
requires very close cooperation and teamwork
b. Standards. among engineering, project management,
contracting, counsel, resource management, small
(1) Contracts should typically be awarded business, audit and other functional elements.
within 145 calendar days, measured from the

EP 715-1-7
31 May 99


3-1. Principles. c. Commanders may appoint qualified

professional personnel, by name and/or position, to:
a. Public announcements for A-E services
will reflect the minimum needs of the Government, (1) Serve as chairpersons and alternate
not arbitrarily restrict eligible firms, and describe the chairpersons of A-E preselection and selection
work required and selection criteria in sufficient boards.
detail to facilitate a meaningful selection of the
most highly qualified firm. (2) Approve A-E selections consistent with
delegated authorities (EFARS 36.602-4(a)).
b. Public announcements for A-E services
will be fully coordinated among all pertinent d. Commanders may designate qualified
functional staff elements. professional personnel, by name and/or position,
who are eligible to serve as voting members of A-E
c. A-E selections will be conducted in a fair, preselection and selection boards, as authorized by
rational and consistent manner, in strict accordance EFARS 36.602-2(a). Alternatively, commanders
with the announced selection criteria, and in may establish appropriate qualifications for voting
compliance with FAR 36.602 and its supplements. board members and delegate authority to the Chief
of Engineering to designate specific personnel who
d. A-E firms will be promptly notified of satisfy those qualifications as voting board
their selection status and offered a meaningful members.
debriefing on the evaluation of their qualification
submission. e. Commanders of Major Subordinate
Commands (MSC) are responsible for quality
3-2. General. The guidance and procedures in assurance of the A-E selection process in their
paragraphs 3-4 through 3-14 generally apply to all subordinate districts. This can be done through the
contracts for A-E services, except as otherwise approval of selections for large or highly visible
noted in paragraph 3-15 for the following special projects, evaluation of district standard operating
cases: contracts not expected to exceed the SAT; procedures for selections, random review of
nonappropriated fund (NAF) projects; contracting completed selection reports, or observing,
with the SBA under the 8(a) Program; unusual and participating in district selection boards, and/or
compelling urgency; work outside the United other appropriate means.
States; medical facilities; design competition; and,
the advance selection process. 3-4. CBD Synopsis.

3-3. Responsibilities. a. Regulatory Requirements. In accordance

with FAR 5.203(d), 5.205(d), and 36.601-1, all
a. The Chief of Engineering in each requirements for A-E services expected to exceed
operating command is responsible for the A-E $25,000 shall be synopsized in the CBD, except
selection process, including the technical content of when properly waived in accordance with FAR
CBD synopses for A-E services (including those 5.202. A response period of at least 30 calendar
prepared by other functional elements), the conduct days shall be allowed for contracts expected to
of A-E evaluation (preselection and selection) exceed the SAT.
boards, participation by customers in evaluation
boards, and liaison with the A-E community. b. Authority to Synopsize. A synopsis for
an A-E contract, which has the equivalent effect as
b. The Chief of Contracting in each a solicitation for other types of contracts, should
operating command is responsible for the not be issued unless the Government has a definite
procurement-related content of CBD synopses for intention to award a contract. Proper authorization
A-E services, and for general oversight of the A-E from higher authority or a customer and adequate
selection process to ensure regulatory compliance. funding should be received prior to synopsizing.

EP 715-1-7
31 May 99

However, for high priority requirements, a synopsis (6) restricting firms to a specific geographic
may be issued prior to receiving formal area;
authorization and/or funding when there is a high
probability that the requirement will not be canceled (7) specifying how the services should be
and the synopsis indicates that funds are not performed (instead, describe the needed end
presently available for the contract (AFARS 1.602- products);
(8) requiring the submission of any cost-
c. Format. Instructions and the format for related data;
preparing CBD synopses are given in FAR 5.207
and DFARS 205.207. Appendix J provides (9) requiring the submission of excessive
supplemental instructions for USACE synopses for qualification information;
A-E services. Appendix K is an example synopsis
for a FFP contract. Appendix L is an example (10) restricting a firm from being considered
synopsis for an ID contract. due to having another current contract with the
same contracting office; or,
d. Content. A synopsis will describe the
contract, project and required services, selection (11) requiring a security clearance to be
criteria, and submission instructions. The synopsis considered for selection (however, eligibility for a
will describe the specific work required in sufficient clearance, such as U.S. citizenship, may be
detail to facilitate a meaningful selection of the required).
most highly qualified firm. (See paragraph 3-1.a.)
The relative importance of all selection criteria must e. Review and Transmittal. A synopsis will
be clearly stated. Do not include criteria that are be prepared by appropriate technical and
not directly related to project requirements or that contracting personnel, and be fully staffed,
unnecessarily restrict competition, such as: including the DSB (see paragraphs 2-5 and 3-1.b).
Obtain legal review of a synopsis for a complex or
(1) specifying the minimum number of unusual contract. Except when justified under
personnel in a firm; urgent circumstances, special contracting approvals
(such as approval of a formal acquisition plan or
(2) specifying non-essential or secondary waiver of standard ID contract limits) will be
disciplines; obtained prior to synopsizing. Synopses will be
transmitted to the CBD electronically as described
(3) specifying disciplines, capabilities or a in FAR 5.207.
percentage of work (except the prime firm in a
small business set-aside) that must be performed f. Contact with Firms. Requests for
"in-house"; clarification of a synopsis and/or for additional
information will be carefully handled to avoid
(4) requiring certification of personnel by a providing any information that would give, or
private organization1; appear to give, an advantage to a firm in submitting
their qualifications. A synopsis will be amended if
(5) requiring metric design experience2; additional information was given to any one firm or
if the synopsis is found to be defective, and the
response date appropriately extended.

3-5. ACASS. ACASS is an automated database

Certifications can still be considered when of A-E qualifications (blocks 1 - 10 of Standard
comparing personnel qualifications, in the same Form (SF) 254, Architect-Engineer and Related
manner that advanced degrees, relevant training, Services Questionnaire), Department of Defense
experience and longevity with the firm are (DoD) A-E contract awards, and performance
considered. evaluations of A-E contractors. ACASS is the only
authorized automated system for this A-E
Metric design is still not a common information in DoD. Appendix M provides
practice in the U.S. commercial market.

EP 715-1-7
31 May 99

additional information on the background, (1) Preselection Board. A chairperson will

regulatory authority, contents and use of ACASS. be at least a section chief or have equivalent
ACASS is part of the Contractor Appraisal technical experience, and have considerable
Information Center maintained by the Portland experience on A-E evaluation boards. A majority of
District. the voting members will have experience on A-E
evaluation boards.
3-6. Board Membership. A-E evaluation boards
should be constituted as follows based on the (2) Selection Board. A chairperson will be at
requirements in FAR 36.602-2(a) and EFARS least a branch chief or have equivalent technical
36.602-2(a). experience, and have extensive experience on A-E
evaluation boards. A majority of the voting
a. General Requirements. The chairperson members will have experience on A-E evaluation
will appoint voting members with appropriate boards. A person may serve as a voting member
expertise from the approved list of eligible on both the preselection and selection boards for
personnel, or who meet the qualifications for voting the same contract.
members established by the commander. Each
board must have at least three voting members. A (3) Partner/Customer Representative(s). In
majority of the voting members must be USACE accordance with EFARS 36.602-2(a), Federal and
personnel. Appropriately qualified technical non-Federal partners/customers will be invited to
personnel from the functional element requesting nominate qualified representatives as members of
the services should be represented as a voting the A-E evaluation boards for their projects, when
member(s). Where practical, a voting practical. Voting and non-voting representative(s)
representative from the cognizant Construction shall be submitted to the respective evaluation
Division will participate on an evaluation board for board chairperson for approval. Voting
an A-E contract for the design of a specific representative(s) must meet the same qualifications
construction project. There is no regulatory as USACE personnel. Specifically, they must have
restriction on a Government employee serving on an the appropriate background to knowledgeably
evaluation board for an A-E contract and later evaluate the experience and qualifications of A-E
participating the negotiation and/or administration firms in the required type of work.
of that contract. However, the KO may impose
such restrictions if necessary to ensure the integrity (4) Boards for Surveying and Mapping
of the system of checks and balances. Services. For contracts principally for real property
surveys, topographic or photogrammetric mapping,
b. Member Qualifications. Evaluation hydrographic surveying, or geodetic surveying, the
boards will be composed of highly qualified majority of the voting members shall have
professional employees having collective experience specialized and current experience in performing or
in architecture, engineering, construction, and supervising the required type(s) of work. At least
acquisition, as well as the specific type of work one licensed land surveyor shall be included as a
being contracted. A board will consist primarily of voting member on boards for contracts principally
architects, engineers and/or land surveyors, as for real property surveys or where state laws
appropriate for the type of work. However, require certain surveying and mapping work to be
personnel in other disciplines may be voting performed by a licensed surveyor. When a
members to provide specialized expertise when command does not have adequate expertise to
needed. The chairperson will be a USACE properly staff an evaluation board for a surveying
Engineering Division employee, and be a registered and mapping contract, technical assistance shall be
or licensed engineer, architect or land surveyor, as obtained from other USACE commands, other
appropriate for the type of work. Professional Federal agencies, or non-Federal partners or
registration of other board members is encouraged. customers.
All board members will comply with the
procurement integrity requirements of FAR 3.104. 3-7. Selection Criteria.
Additional board membership requirements are:
a. Regulatory Requirements. FAR 36.602-
1(a) and DFARS 236.602-1(a)(6) specify the

EP 715-1-7
31 May 99

general A-E selection criteria. DFARS 236.602- (including management structure; coordination of
1(a)(6) emphasizes that "the primary factor in A-E disciplines, offices and/or subcontractors; and prior
selection is the determination of the most highly working relationships) will also be examined.
qualified firm," and that secondary factors should
not be given greater significance than technical (b) Professional Qualifications (FAR 36.602-
qualifications and past performance. 1(a)(1)). A board will evaluate, as appropriate, the
education, training, registration, certifications (see
b. Specific Project Criteria. DFARS paragraph 3-4.d(4)), overall and relevant
236.602-1(a)(i) requires that a synopsis state the experience, and longevity with the firm of the key
order of importance of the selection criteria and that management and technical personnel. This criterion
the criteria be project specific. Specific project is primarily concerned with the qualifications of the
criteria should be stated in the context of the key personnel and not the number of personnel,
general FAR and DFARS criteria, as illustrated in which is addressed under the capacity criterion.
Appendices K and L. Reference to CBD Numbered The lead designer in each discipline must be
Note 24 (listed in the CBD Reader's Guide in all registered as required by FAR 36.609-4 and
Monday editions) is not a sufficient description of 52.236-25, but does not have to be registered in
project selection criteria. the particular state where the project is located.

c. Application of Selection Criteria. Boards (c) Past Performance (FAR 36.602-1(a)(4)).

will evaluate firms' qualifications strictly on the
basis of the announced selection criteria and their - ACASS is the primary source of
stated order of importance. The criteria will be information on past performance (DFARS 236.602-
applied as follows: 1(a)(4)). ACASS will be queried for all prime firms.
Performance evaluations for any significant
(1) Primary Selection Criteria. The following subcontractors may also be considered. Any
criteria are primary and will be applied by a credible, documented information on past
preselection board to determine the highly qualified performance should be considered, but a board is
firms and by a selection board to determine the not required to seek other information on the past
most highly qualified firms. The primary criteria are performance of a firm if none is available from
listed in the order of importance which is usually ACASS. However, do not use any adverse
most appropriate, however they may be ordered performance information which a firm has not had
differently as warranted for specific contracts. an opportunity to comment on. Also, complete
evaluations, and not summaries, will be reviewed if
(a) Specialized Experience and Technical a board is considering downgrading or eliminating
Competence (FAR 36.602-1(a)(2)). A board will a firm due to adverse past performance evaluations.
evaluate the specialized experience on similar
projects3 and the technical capabilities (such as - A board will consider the relevancy of each
design quality management procedures, CADD, performance evaluation to the proposed contract,
equipment resources, and laboratory requirements) including the type of work, contract or task order
of the prime firm and any subcontractors. Evaluate, value, performing office, recentness, and general
where appropriate, experience in energy trends in a firm's performance. A firm that has
conservation, pollution prevention, waste reduction, earned excellent evaluations on recent DoD A-E
and the use of recovered materials. The contracts for similar projects will be ranked
effectiveness of the proposed project team relatively higher on past performance (DFARS
236.602-1(a)(6)(B)). If no relevant past
performance information is available on a firm, the
firm will be given a neutral evaluation regarding
General experience working for certain past performance.
customers, such as DoD, Army, Air Force or
USACE, is not an appropriate selection criteria. (d) Capacity (FAR 36.602-1(a)(3)).
Instead, the selection criteria should address
experience in certain types of projects or work, and - A board will consider a firm's experience
knowledge of essential laws, regulations and/or with similar size projects and the available capacity

EP 715-1-7
31 May 99

of key disciplines when evaluating the capacity of joint venture partner; the greater the participation,
a firm to perform the work in the required time. the greater the consideration5.
Consider the full potential value of any current ID
contracts that a firm has been awarded when (b) Geographic Proximity (FAR 36.602-
evaluating capacity. 1(a)(5)). Proximity is simply the physical location of
a firm6 in relation to the location of a project, and
- Since it may be difficult for a firm to has very little to do with the technical ability of a
accurately predict required staffing based on the firm to perform the project. Hence, proximity
information in a synopsis, a firm should not be should normally only be used as a selection criterion
disqualified or downgraded because of its proposed for small or routine projects or ID contracts in
number of personnel for a project shown in Block 4 support of a specific installation(s).
of the SF 255. Instead, a board should consider
the total strength of the key disciplines in the prime (c) Volume of DoD Contract Awards
firm and its consultants in the offices proposed to (DFARS 236.602-1(a)(6)(A)).
perform the work in relationship to the firms'
current workloads. - DFARS states "do not reject the overall
most highly qualified firm solely in the interest of
(e) Knowledge of the Locality (FAR 36.602- equitable distribution of contracts." Hence,
1(a)(5)). Consider knowledge of the locality equitable distribution of DoD contracts must be
separately from geographic proximity, since the treated as a secondary criterion. DoD A-E contract
latter is a secondary criterion in accordance with awards can be obtained from ACASS, and verified
DFARS 236.602-1(a)(6). (A firm may not be and updated during the interviews with the most
located close to a project but still be familiar with highly qualified firms. The synopsis may also
certain site conditions.) Examples include request firms to submit DoD contract award data in
knowledge of geological features, climatic block 10 of the SF 255. Only consider awards of
conditions or local construction methods that are A-E contracts. Include awards to all branch offices
unusual or unique. of a company, except as indicated in DFARS
(2) Secondary Selection Criteria. The
secondary criteria will not be applied by a - For ID contracts, consider the total value of
preselection board, and will only be used by a task orders actually issued by agencies in the last
selection board as a "tie-breaker" (see paragraph 3- 12 months, and not the potential value of the
10.e), if necessary, in ranking the most highly contracts. For all types of contracts, do not
qualified firms. The secondary criteria will not be consider options that have not been exercised.
commingled with the primary criteria in any type of
scoring or evaluation system4. The secondary
criteria are listed in the order of importance which
are usually most appropriate for USACE contracts.
A subcontracting plan, in accordance with
(a) SB and SDB Participation (DFARS FAR 19.704 and 52.219-9, should not be
236.602-1(a)(6)(C)). The extent of participation of requested from each firm which responds to a
SB, SDB, historically black colleges and universities synopsis. This would be burdensome, as well as
(HBCU), and minority institutions (MI) will be impractical since the firms do not have a complete
measured as a percentage of the total anticipated statement of work at this point. Prime A-E firms
contract effort, regardless of whether the SB, SDB, can, however, be asked to indicate the estimated
HBCU or MI is a prime contractor, subcontractor, or percentage involvement of each SB and SDB firm
on the team. A formal subcontracting plan is only
required from the firm selected for negotiations.

4 6
If the criteria were commingled, a firm When multiple offices of the prime firm
could be selected that was not the best qualified and/or subcontractors will be involved in the
technically, but received high consideration on the performance of a project, consider the weighted
secondary criteria. This outcome would be contrary distance from the project based on the relative
to the intent of the Brooks A-E Act. amount of participation of each performing office.

EP 715-1-7
31 May 99

3-8. General Procedures for Evaluation Boards. whereby "at least 50% of the cost of contract
performance incurred for personnel" must be
a. Information Used by Boards. Boards will expended for employees of the prime firm as
only consider the following information: SF 254, as required by FAR 19.508(e) and 52.219-14. Any
submitted or from ACASS; SF 255, with any questions will be referred to the DSB and the
required supplemental information; documented Contracting Directorate/Division.
performance evaluations, such as from ACASS;
DoD contract award data; and the results of d. Evaluation Methods. Preselection and
interviews of the most highly qualified firms. A selection boards may use either a qualitative or
board will not assume qualifications which are not quantitative method to evaluate firms.
clearly stated in a firm's submission or available
from ACASS. A board will review the entire (1) Qualitative Method. Using this method,
submission of each firm and not excerpts or a board compares the qualifications of the firms by
summaries. A firm will not be contacted to clarify iterative discussions, considering the relative
or supplement its submission, except during the importance of each selection criterion. By
interviews with the most highly qualified firms (see consensus, the board progressively eliminates the
paragraph 3-10.d). Boards shall not consider any lesser qualified firms and agrees on the basis for
cost factors. elimination.

b. A-E Submissions. (2) Quantitative Method. Using this method,

a board establishes a numerical scoring system in
(1) A-E submissions shall be handled by the accordance with the order of importance of the
Government in accordance with FAR 15.207 and selection criteria (see Appendix N for example), and
15.208, including the late proposal rules in FAR evaluates the firms accordingly. The relative ranking
15.208. A firm will not be considered if block 11 of the firms according to total scores must
of its SF 255 is not signed, unless the SF 255 is represent a consensus; individual scores must not
accompanied with a signed cover letter or a current be simply averaged to produce a consensus score.
signed SF 254. If a firm does not submit a SF 254 The board report must explain the scoring system.
with its SF 255, or have one on file in ACASS, it
will not be considered (FAR 36.603(b)). ACASS e. Reports. The documentation must
qualification data will be used, if available, if a firm reflect the final consensus of a board. If
does not submit a SF 254 with its SF 255, even if preliminary (such as prior to board discussions or
a SF 254 was requested in the synopsis. interviews) or individual evaluations are included,
the report must discuss how any significant
(2) Although firms are encouraged to update differences among the evaluations were resolved.
their SF 254 at least annually (FAR 36.603(d)(1)), Handwritten worksheets are acceptable. The cover
older ones (up to 3 years old in accordance with and each page of the report containing source
FAR 36.603(d)(5)) must still be considered by a selection information will be labeled "SOURCE
board. A firm may not be eliminated simply for SELECTION INFORMATION - SEE FAR 3.104" and
failing to submit certain information or for altering be protected as required by FAR 3.104-5.
the format of a SF 254 or SF 255. However, a firm
may be recommended as not qualified or ranked 3-9. Preselection Board.
low if missing, confusing, conflicting, obsolete or
obscure information prevents a board from a. General. Preselection boards are
reasonably determining that a firm demonstrates permitted by FAR 36.602-2(a) and authorized by
certain required qualifications. DFARS 236.602-2(a). Preselection boards may be
advantageous when many firms respond to a
c. Small Business Status. If a contract has synopsis, but generally the use of only a selection
been set aside for small business in accordance board is faster and less costly. The purpose of a
with FAR 19.5, the preselection board must check preselection board is to determine which firms are
that each prime firm has certified itself as a small highly qualified and have a reasonable chance of
business on the SF 254. The board must also be being considered as most highly qualified by the
aware that there is a limitation on subcontracting

EP 715-1-7
31 May 99

selection board (DFARS 236.602-2(a) and EFARS higher aggregate qualifications relevant to the
36.602-2 (S-100)). primary selection criteria are considered to be the
most highly qualified firms. Secondary selection
b. Determination of Highly Qualified Firms. criteria will not be considered in determining which
Each firm will be completely evaluated, even if a firms are most highly qualified. At least three most
firm does not demonstrate certain required highly qualified firms must be recommended7 if a
qualifications. A firm may be evaluated by only one single contract will be awarded. If more than one
voting member. However, all evaluations will be contract will be awarded from the same synopsis,
discussed by the entire board and a consensus sufficient firms must be recommended such that at
reached on each firm. The firms which least two most highly qualified firms remain in
demonstrate better aggregate qualifications relevant reserve when negotiations commence on the final
to the primary selection criteria are considered contract.
highly qualified. A preselection board will not
consider any secondary selection criteria. A d. Interviews.
preselection board will not be restricted to a
specific or maximum number of firms for referral to (1) Interviews (discussions) will be held with
a selection board. all of the most highly qualified firms as required by
FAR 36.602-3(c). All firms will be interviewed by
c. Report. A preselection board report will the same method (telephone, video teleconference
be prepared similar to Appendix O. The report must or in person). For a routine project, at least one
clearly identify the specific weak or deficient voting member will conduct the interview. For a
qualifications of each firm not recommended as major project, the majority of the voting members
highly qualified. The report will be provided to the will conduct the interview. For a very significant
selection board and made a part of the selection project, presentations by the firms are
boards report. Separate approval of a preselection recommended, which should be attended by all
report is not required. voting members. Firms will be given sufficient
advance notice to allow responsible representatives
3-10. Selection Board. to participate in the interviews or presentations.

a. General. The functions of a selection (2) All firms will be asked similar questions
board are described in FAR 36.602-3. A selection about their experience, capabilities, capacity,
board evaluates the highly qualified firms identified organization, management, quality control
by the preselection board and recommends at least procedures, and approach for the project, as
three firms considered to be most highly qualified, appropriate. All questions must relate to the
in order of preference. If a preselection board was announced selection criteria. Information obtained
not held, the initial phase of the selection board will from an interview that influenced the final ranking
be conducted and documented similar to a will be documented in the selection report.
preselection board.
e. Final Ranking of Most Highly Qualified
b. Review of Preselection Report. If a Firms. After the interviews or presentations, a
selection board considers the preselection board board will rank the most highly qualified firms in
report inadequate, it will record the reasons and order of preference using the primary selection
return the report to the preselection board for criteria. If two or more firms are technically equal,
appropriate action. A selection board need not the secondary criteria will be used as "tie-breakers."
return the preselection report because it considers Firms are technically equal when there is no
some of the firms to be less than highly qualified,
provided a sufficient number of highly qualified
firms remain.
c. Determination of Most Highly Qualified If the selection board can not recommend
Firms. All voting members must personally at least three firms as required by the Brooks A-E
evaluate the SFs 254 and 255 of all of the highly Act, then the scope of the contract must be revised
qualified firms. The firms which demonstrate to increase competition and the contract synopsized

EP 715-1-7
31 May 99

meaningful difference in their aggregate accordance with EFARS 36.607(a)8. No

qualifications relative to the primary criteria. notifications will be made after a preselection
f. Report. A selection board report should
be prepared in a format similar to Appendix P. The b. The notification shall indicate to the firm
report must: clearly describe the reasons why each that it is the highest qualified, among the most
eliminated firm was less qualified than the most highly qualified but not the highest qualified, or not
highly qualified firms, summarize the relative among the most highly qualified firms. The
strengths of each most highly qualified firm with notification will also inform each firm that it may
respect to the selection criteria, and clearly describe request a debriefing, but must do so in writing or
the rationale for the relative ranking of each firm. electronically within 10 days after receiving the
notification. The identity of the firm (or firms if
3-11. Approval of Selections. multiple awards will be made from one synopsis)
selected for negotiations may be released after the
a. As permitted by DFARS 236.602-4(a), selection report is approved (FAR 36.607(a)).
EFARS 36.602-4(a) delegates unlimited A-E Within 10 days after contract award, all remaining
selection approval authority to MSC commanders, most highly qualified firms shall be so notified.
who may redelegate this authority as appropriate
for the dollar value and nature of various categories c. When an acquisition is canceled, notices
of A-E contracts. If a synopsis is for more than one will be sent to all firms that responded to the public
contract, the level of selection approval authority announcement within 10 days of the cancellation.
will be determined by the greatest anticipated value When an acquisition will be significantly delayed,
of any one of the contracts (including all options), notices will be promptly sent to all firms still being
and not the aggregate value of all of the contracts. considered, giving the estimated award date.
The concurrence of the Chief, Engineering Division
and the District Commander or Deputy is required 3-13. Debriefings.
for district selections requiring MSC approval.
a. There are two main objectives for a
b. FAR 36.602-4 and DFARS 236.602-4 debriefing. First, instill confidence in the debriefed
provide guidance if the selection authority does not firm that the selection was conducted fairly and
agree with the recommendations of a selection objectively in accordance with the announced
board. All firms on an approved selection list are selection criteria. Second, provide the firm with
considered "selected" in accordance with FAR specific information to allow it to improve its weak
36.602-4(b). Selection approval authorizes the qualifications in order to better compete for future
initiation of negotiation, beginning with the highest similar projects.
qualified firm.

c. No contract may be awarded after one

year from the closing date of a CBD synopsis unless
justified in writing by the KO. The KO will consider
whether the selected firms qualifications and the HQUSACE has determined that the time
specific A-E market are substantially unchanged periods for notification and debriefing of firms in
since the selection. FAR 15.503 and 15.506 are impractical to follow
for A-E contracts due to the large number of A-E
3-12. Notifications. selections annually and the heavy volume of
responses to each synopsis. Hence, as permitted
a. Notifications of firms shall be made by FAR 15.502, the time periods have been
within 10 days after selection approval in reasonably modified for USACE A-E contracts.
Also, the specific instruction in FAR 36.607(b) that
the (notification and) debriefing of successful and
unsuccessful A-E firms will be held after selection
approval takes precedence over the instruction in
FAR 15.5 that notification and debriefing will occur
after contract award.

EP 715-1-7
31 May 99

b. Unless impractical, debriefing of required by the selection board. The firms will be
unsuccessful firms will be conducted within 14 given a reasonable period to respond.
days after receipt of a written request in
accordance with FAR 15.506 (except 15.506(d)(2)- (2) Contract Actions Expected to Exceed
(d)(5)) and 36.607(b), and EFARS 36.607(b). A $10,000 but not $25,000. Synopsis in the CBD is
request under the Freedom of Information Act not required. Instead, an announcement containing
(FOIA; AR 25-55) will be immediately referred to information similar to a CBD synopsis will be posted
the local FOIA officer. in a public place at the contracting office (FAR
5.101(a)(2)). In addition to the firms that respond
c. Debriefings will be conducted by to the announcement, other firms may be identified
telephone or in person, as mutually agreed. and evaluated as described in paragraph 3-15.a(1).
Debriefings will be conducted by a USACE voting
board member, preferably the chairperson, of the (3) Contracts Not Expected to Exceed
preselection or selection board, as appropriate. The $10,000. No public announcement is required. A
debriefing will be based on the preselection or reasonable number of qualified firms must be
selection board report, as appropriate. The identified and evaluated as described in paragraph
debriefing will summarize the significant 3-15.a(1).
weaknesses or deficiencies in a firms qualifications
(FAR 15.506(d)(1)). A firms qualifications will not (4) Contracts Not Exceeding $2,500.
be compared point-by-point with those of any other Contracts which do not exceed the micro-purchase
specific firm, but with the other firms collectively threshold of $2,500 may be procured using credit
(FAR 15.506(e)). Also, a firms SFs 254/255 will cards in accordance with EFARS 36.601-3(S-100)
not be revealed or given to any other firm (FAR and 36.602-5(S-100).
15.506(e) and 24.202(a)). The identity of the other
firms considered, except the highest qualified firm, b. NAF Contracts (AR 215-4).
shall not be revealed.
(1) Public announcement is not required. If
3-14. Disposition of SFs 254 and 255. SFs 254 a contract is synopsized in the CBD, it may be for
and 255 will be carefully safeguarded, and retained less than 30 days. A list of qualified firms may be
in accordance with EFARS 36.603(b). SFs 254 developed from: ACASS; recommendations of the
received by a USACE office will be promptly sent to installation, NAF sponsor, or professional societies;
ACASS if requested by a firm. responses to a public announcement; or, any other
appropriate source.
3-15. Special Cases.
(2) Evaluation boards will be conducted and
a. Contract Actions Not Expected to documented as described elsewhere in this
Exceed $100,000 (SAT). The short A-E selection pamphlet, except that the selection criteria will
processes in FAR 36.602-5 may be used. A comply with AR 215-4. In particular, equitable
purchase order, with the appropriate clauses for distribution of DoD contracts and the extent of
A-E services, may be used to simplify and expedite participation of SB, SDB, HBCU and MI are not
award instead of using SF 252, Architect-Engineer used as selection criteria. Also, geographic
Contract. proximity need not be treated as a secondary
criterion. Normal selection approval procedures are
(1) Contract Actions Expected to Exceed followed.
$25,000 but not $100,000. Synopsis in the CBD
is required. The response period may be less than c. Contracting with the Small Business
30 days (FAR 5.203(d)); at least 10-15 days is Administration (FAR 19.8 and EFARS 19.802).
recommended. If an insufficient number of qualified
firms respond to the synopsis, other qualified firms (1) A-E services may be procured through
may be identified from ACASS and any other the SBA's 8(a) Program. USACE may request the
means. These firms will be contacted about their names of 8(a) firms from SBA or recommend
interest, sent the synopsis, and requested to submit qualified 8(a) firms to SBA for approval. Firms
an updated SF 254 and possibly a SF 255 as present their qualifications using a SF 254, and a

EP 715-1-7
31 May 99

SF 255 if required by the selection board. The f. Medical Facilities. ER 1110-345-721

qualifications of 8(a) firms will be reviewed and provides special requirements for the selection of
documented by USACE in accordance with FAR A-E firms for medical and medical research
36.602. facilities9. HQUSACE (ATTN: CEMP-EM) will be
consulted in the preparation of synopses and the
(2) Contracts of $3,000,000 or less can be conduct of the evaluation boards. CEMP-EM will
awarded through sole source procedures (FAR direct when negotiations may be initiated.
19.805-1) and only one highly qualified firm need
be considered. Contracts over $3,000,000 are g. Design Competition (FAR 36.602-1(b)).
competitive; a selection board evaluates and ranks The use of design competition shall be approved by
the qualified 8(a) firms and negotiations are initiated HQUSACE (ATTN: CEMP-E).
with the highest qualified firm. See paragraph 3-
8.c on the limitation on subcontracting. h. Advance Selection Process. EFARS
36.602 (S-100) authorizes an advance A-E
d. Unusual and Compelling Urgency (FAR announcement and selection process if two or more
5.202(a)(2) and 6.302-2). If the conditions in FAR A-E contracts for the same type of work are
6.302-2 are met, public announcement is not reasonably anticipated in a given period in a
required. However, as many firms as is practical particular geographic area. Announcement and
under the circumstances should be identified using selection may be conducted prior to receiving
the process described in paragraph 3-15.a(1). specific authorization for any work of that type.
Normal selection and approval procedures are Procedures for this process are provided in
followed. Appendix Q.

e. Work Contracted and Performed Outside 3-16. EP 715-1-4. This pamphlet describes the
the United States (FAR 5.202(a)(12)). If the A-E contracting process in USACE and how firms
contract action is awarded and performed outside may obtain consideration for contracts. This
of the United States, synopsis in the CBD is not information is useful for firms seeking an A-E
required. Normal selection and approval procedures contract with USACE and should be widely
are followed. However, see the restriction in distributed to the A-E community.
DFARS 236.602-70 on the award of overseas A-E
contracts to foreign firms.

ER 1110-345-721 states that the selection
board and selection approval for medical projects
will be done at HQUSACE. These functions have
since been delegated to the responsible design
district by a change to EFARS 36.602-2(a) and

EP 715-1-7
31 May 99


4-1. Principles. negotiation team for that contract. Also, there is

no regulation which precludes a member of the
a. Contract negotiation is a team effort negotiation team from participating in the
among properly trained and well prepared personnel administration of the contract. However, the KO
in engineering, contracting, counsel, project may impose such restrictions if necessary to ensure
management and other appropriate functional the integrity of the system of checks and balances.
b. Training. Engineers, architects and
b. Negotiation will be based on a thorough surveyors who are primary participants in A-E
SOW which fully conveys the customers negotiations will have the following minimum
requirements and the pertinent technical criteria. contracting training:

c. Negotiations will be conducted in a (1) Architect-Engineer Contracting,

professional and sincere manner. PROSPECT course 004; or Defense Acquisition
University course CON 243 (same title).
d. The primary objective in negotiation is to
agree on a price which is fair and reasonable to the (2) A basic Federal contracting course,
Government (not necessarily the lowest price) and approved by the local Director/Chief of Contracting.
gives the A-E firm sufficient financial incentive to
produce quality services and products on schedule. (3) A Government contract law course,
approved by the local Director/Chief of Contracting.
4-2. Responsibilities. Commanders will ensure
that personnel who negotiate A-E services are 4-5. Statement of Work. A thorough SOW is the
properly trained. basis for negotiating a fair and reasonable price,
successful performance, and fair and effective
4-3. Regulatory Basis. A-E contract negotiations administration of an A-E contract or task order.
will be primarily conducted in accordance with FAR The SOW is included as Section C in the USACE
15.4, 36.605 and 36.606, and supplements A-E contract format (EFARS 15.406-1(a)(2)(A)). A
thereto. SOW will typically include the following topics:

4-4. Negotiation Team. a. General responsibilities of the A-E firm.

a. Team Members. b. Project description, including estimated

construction cost, if relevant.
(1) A-E contract negotiation is a team effort
among engineers, architects, contracting c. Scope of A-E services.
specialists, counsel, contract auditors (provide
advisory support) and other specialists, under the d. Schedule and deliverables. Refer to the
authority of the KO who is solely responsible for most recent guidance from the Tri-Service
the final price agreement (FAR 15.405(a)). The CADD/GIS Technology Center on sample contract
negotiation team must collectively have a thorough language for CADD and GIS deliverables.
knowledge and understanding of the A-E business
community, the detailed project requirements, e. Reviews and conferences.
applicable technical criteria, and contracting
policies. (In this pamphlet, negotiators means the f. Technical criteria and sta ndards,
members of the Government negotiation team.) including Government-furnished information.

(2) There is no regulation which precludes a g. Administrative instructions.

Government employee that sat on an evaluation
board for an A-E contract from participating on the h. General provisions.

EP 715-1-7
31 May 99

4-6. Request for Price Proposal. A firm will be 36.606(e), 44.204(b) and 52.244-4) 1.
notified by the KO in writing (except for urgent
situations) of its selection for negotiation of a (7) Subcontracting plan requirements and
contract action and requested to submit a price reporting if the A-E firm is a large business and the
proposal (FAR 36.606(b)). Appendix R provides contract is over $500,000 (see paragraphs 4-15
RFPP instructions. and 5-8).

4-7. Preproposal Conference. 4-8. Partnering.

a. General. When appropriate, a a. General. Partnering is the development

preproposal conference(s) may be held between the and sustainment of a relationship that promotes
A-E firm and pertinent Government representatives achievement of mutually beneficial goals. See ER
to discuss and resolve questions concerning the 1110-1-12 for additional guidance on partnering,
contract requirements, SOW, and RFPP including a sample partnering agreement. If a
instructions. The project site may also be inspected formal partnering agreement is desired by the
if appropriate. An A-E firms costs for preparing Government and/or the A-E firm, it should be
proposals and attending preproposal conferences discussed during negotiations. However, partnering
are normal costs of doing business and are included is voluntary and does not begin until after contract
in a firms overhead rate. A firm is not award.
compensated for attending a preproposal
conference unless the firm performs work of b. Costs. Since it is voluntary, a firm is not
tangible benefit to the Government in connection directly compensated for partnering on its contract.
with the conference, and the work is properly Typically, the Government and the A-E firm share
authorized in advance by the KO. the costs of partnering, with the A-E firm absorbing
its costs in its overhead. However, an A-E firm
b. Contract Requirements. At the may be compensated for participating in partnering
preproposal conference or at some other time early meetings during construction when the firms
in the negotiation period, the Government will attendance is necessary to discuss the design
discuss the following contract requirements with intent, procedures for responding to the
the A-E firm and document these discussions in the construction contractors questions on the drawings
price negotiation memorandum (PNM): and specifications, scheduling considerations, or
similar project issues. Partnering meetings should
(1) Performance evaluation process (FAR be scheduled concurrently with required meetings
36.604, EFARS 36.604 and Chapter 6 of this to minimize costs.
4-9. Service Contract Act (SCA). The SCA (FAR
(2) Liability for Government costs resulting 22.10) applies to an A-E contract if the SOW
from design errors or deficiencies (FAR 36.608, involves the use of service employees (such as
36.609-2, and 52.236-23, and Chapter 7 of this drilling and survey crews, clerks, CADD operators,
pamphlet). photographers, and laboratory technicians) to a

(3) Design within funding limitations (FAR

36.609-1 and 52.236-22), when applicable.
The prime A-E firm must obtain the KOs

(4) Registration of designers (FAR 36.609-4 consent to change any subcontractors that were
and 52.236-25), when applicable. identified during selection and negotiation. The KO
should refer the qualifications of any new
(5) Payments (FAR 32.111(d)(1) and subcontractor to the original selection board (to the
52.232-10, and paragraph 5-7 of this pamphlet). extent that these individuals are available) for
evaluation. The KO and negotiators may and
(6) Subcontractors and Outside Associates should strongly encourage contractors to use a
and Consultants (Architect-Engineer Services) (FAR qualification-based selection process like the Brooks
A-E Act instead of bidding when selecting
subcontractors for professional services.

EP 715-1-7
31 May 99

significant or substantial extent. If the SCA applies, Appendix U. Proposal analysis includes technical
a wage determination (WD) must be obtained from analysis, price analysis and cost analysis.
the U.S. Department of Labor (DoL) for the service
employees anticipated in the contract. In most b. Audit. An audit should be considered for
cases, the WD may be obtained electronically the cases listed in DFARS 215.404-2(a)(i)3, and this
through the Labor Advisor in the local Office of consideration documented in the PNM. An audit is
Counsel. The WD must be provided to the firm for appropriate if the available information is inadequate
use in preparing its proposal. The proposed labor to determine the reasonableness of the proposed
rates and benefits for service employees must be at price (FAR 15.404-2(a)). The Defense Contract
least equal to the WD. For surveying and mapping Audit Agency is the cognizant audit agency for
contracts, the WD for the location of the performing most USACE contracts.
office shall be used instead for the WD for the
location of the work2. c. Prenegotiation Objectives (PNO).

4-10. Independent Government Estimate (IGE). In (1) PNO are developed after a proposal has
accordance with FAR 36.605(a), an IGE is required been analyzed. The PNO are the pertinent
for each A-E contract action expected to exceed negotiation issues and the cost and profit objectives
$100,000 (total absolute value of all elements of (FAR 15.406-1). The numerical objectives will be
the action, including credits). An informal or shown in a tabular comparison with the
working estimate is recommended for actions of corresponding elements of the proposal, IGE, and
$100,000 or less. An IGE will be prepared and audit (if available). Keyed to the numerical
approved in accordance with the procedures in objectives will be a discussion of the significant
Appendices S and T. Disclosure of the IGE will differences among the IGE, audit (if performed),
comply with FAR 36.605(b). PNO and proposal, and the issues to be covered
during the negotiations. The PNO may be organized
4-11. Fact-Finding Sessions. The negotiators may by phase of work, task, discipline, or other
hold fact-finding sessions (FAR 15.406-1(a)) with appropriate manner.
a firm after receiving its price proposal and prior to
negotiations. The purpose of fact-finding is to (2) The review and approval of PNO will be
obtain information to better understand the in accordance with local procedures and at the
proposal and its assumptions, and to clarify any lowest practicable level appropriate for the
ambiguities, omissions or uncertainties in the RFPP complexity, risk and dollar value of the contract
and SOW apparent after review of the proposal. action. Local procedures may exempt the review
After fact-finding, a revised proposal may be and approval of PNO for small or routine actions.
requested. Detailed proposal analysis or audit
should not be performed until a conforming 4-13. Negotiation of FFP Contracts.
proposal (a proposal which properly reflects the
SOW and complies with the RFPP instructions) is a. Conduct of Negotiations. Negotiations
received. No negotiation will take place during fact- should be conducted in an atmosphere of
finding; that is, the Government will not state its professionalism, patience, and trust. The KO will
bargaining position or objectives during fact-finding. assign appropriate responsibilities to the team
members according to their expertise and maintain
4-12. Proposal Analysis and Prenegotiation overall positive control of the negotiations. The
Objectives. negotiation team must be fully prepared and know
what flexibility there is in the Government position.
a. Proposal Analysis. An A-E proposal will The negotiators must focus on the pertinent issues
be analyzed in accordance with FAR 15.404 and

Also consider an audit for an ID contract
In accordance with CIR Information Letter No. where the total contract amount, including all
96-3, CECC-L, 26 July 1996, subject: Service option periods, exceeds the pertinent threshold in
Contract Act Wage Determinations Relating to DFARS 215.404-2(a)(i) for the anticipated type of
Surveying and Mapping Services. task order (fixed-price or cost-reimbursement).

EP 715-1-7
31 May 99

and be willing to adjust the Government's position U). Labor rates will be examined by audit or review
when appropriate. of payroll records and evaluated for reasonableness.
Overhead costs will be reviewed, which may
b. Statement of Work. include an audit, for allowability in accordance with
FAR 31.2. The review will address the allocability
(1) General. The Government and A-E firm of overhead costs to the contract, the acceptability
should have a common understanding of the SOW of specific costs according to FAR 31.205,
before discussing effort and price. The negotiators conformance with accounting standards (FAR 30),
must ensure that the firm is proposing to use and reasonableness.
personnel and procedures appropriate for the
required work. The negotiators must know if there (b) Labor and overhead rates are negotiable.
is any flexibility in the SOW requirements, including The reasonableness of labor and overhead rates will
the performance schedule. It might be possible to be evaluated by comparison with relevant market
reach agreement if one or more items in the SOW surveys (Appendix T) and similar recent proposals
are modified or deleted, or provided by the (FAR 15.404-1(c)). When assessing
Government. reasonableness, a firms costs should be compared
to efficient, competitive firms in the same class (see
(2) Construction Cost. For a contract Appendix S, paragraph 6.a). Verification of the
involving design, agreement must be reached on the actuality of labor rates and overhead rates, such as
estimated construction cost (ECC) of the project by audit, does not necessarily mean that they are
because it directly impacts compliance with the 6 reasonable. Also, since firms can properly allocate
percent statutory limitation (paragraph 4-13.c(3)) costs in different ways, overhead rates, labor rates
and the Design within Funding Limitation clause and the assignment of costs as direct or overhead
(paragraph 4-7.b(6)). The A-E firm must submit must be considered together to fairly evaluate
evidence of any perceived deficiencies in the reasonableness.
Government cost estimate before the Government
agrees to any adjustment to the ECC. (c) Accordingly, the PNO for labor rates and
overhead rates shall not be based upon arbitrary
c. Price. Bottom-line price agreement is the caps. If labor rates and/or overhead rates are so
primary negotiation objective. However, the high as to make the total price unreasonable, the
negotiators should make a bottom-line price offer negotiators should first seek justifiable reductions in
only as a final attempt to reach agreement after the judgmental elements of the proposal (such as
there is a common understanding of the SOW. The labor hours and position classifications) before
negotiators should not be preoccupied with any negotiating the labor rates and overhead rates.
single cost item (such as labor hours, labor rates,
overhead rates or profit) since agreement on every (2) Profit. It is in the Government's interest
item is not required to reach overall price agreement to negotiate sufficient profit to stimulate efficient
(FAR 15.405(a) and (b)). Conversely, final contract performance and to attract the best
agreement does not indicate agreement on all capabilities of qualified firms (FAR 15.404-4(a)(2)
elements of the proposal. Significant items and (3)). Profit must not be negotiated until all
affecting price agreement must be discussed in costs have been agreed to. The negotiators should
accordance with the PNO. The negotiators should be primarily concerned with the total dollar amount
not place themselves in a position where they are of proposed profit, and not the method or rationale
defending the Governments position. Rather, a used by the firm to estimate profit for itself and any
firm should be requested to explain and support its subcontractors (FAR 15.404-4(c)(5)). The profit
proposal and to offer appropriate revisions. method for A-E contracts in EFARS 15.793-101 is
Significant elements in price negotiation are only used in preparing the Government estimate of
discussed below. a fair and reasonable price. A firm is not required
to compute its profit by this method.
(1) Labor and Overhead Costs.
(3) Statutory Limitation. The portion of the
(a) Position classifications and labor hours contract price for A-E services for the preparation
will be evaluated in the technical analysis (Appendix of designs, plans, drawings and specifications may

EP 715-1-7
31 May 99

not exceed 6 percent of the projects ECC (FAR accordance with FAR Part 43.
15.404-4(c)(4)(i)(B) and 36.606(a), and DFARS
236.606-70). This limitation is statutory (10 4-14. Negotiation of ID Contracts. The negotiation
U.S.C. 4540(b)). EFARS 36.606-70(c) provides of an ID contract is similar to a FFP contract,
examples of services which may be excluded from however the negotiation of total prices pertains only
the A-E contract price when determining to the task orders issued under an ID contract.
compliance with the statutory limitation. These Agreement on labor rates and overhead rates is the
examples will be used as a guide in determining central issue in the negotiation of an ID contract.
other types of services which may be excluded.
Preparation of the construction cost estimate is not a. Labor and Overhead Rates.
excluded.4 The 6 percent statutory limitation does
not apply to a design-build contract, but does apply (1) Labor and overhead rates will be
to an A-E contract for developing a design-build evaluated similar to a FFP contract. Negotiation
solicitation. should concentrate on the important position
classifications anticipated to be used in the
d. Acceptance or Termination of contract. A specific hourly or daily rate must be
Negotiations. If agreement is reached, the firm will negotiated for each position classification, and a
be advised not to begin work until directed by the common understanding reached on the type of
KO. If agreement can not be reached, the firm will work that each level of employee will do.
be requested to submit its best and final offer in
writing (FAR 36.606(f)) within a reasonable time. (2) Disagreement over the labor rate for a
If the firm does not submit a final offer in the stated certain position classification might be resolved by
time, its last written proposal will be used as the the use of additional classification levels (such as
final offer. No further discussions will be held with three experience levels for an architect instead of
a firm if its final offer is not completely acceptable. one), or by adjusting the proportion of time of
The firm will be sent a brief letter stating that individual employees with different labor rates
negotiations are terminated. A PNM will be which comprise that classification. Also,
prepared documenting the unsuccessful disagreement over labor and/or overhead rates may
negotiations and be approved by the KO. be resolved by negotiating composite labor and
Negotiations may then begin with the next ranked overhead rates. Rates (or a method for determining
firm. To preclude complaint or protest by the rates, such as reference to Engineering News-
unsuccessful firm, no significant changes should be Record cost indices) for contract option periods
made in the SOW during negotiations with the next must also be negotiated.
b. Travel. The schedule of negotiated
e. Modifications. The negotiation of contract rates will include unit costs for all
modifications generally follows the same anticipated travel items such as vehicle cost per
procedures as the negotiation of contracts in mile or day and per diem for certain locations of
work. For travel which can not be anticipated, the
contract may include a statement that travel costs
will be computed in accordance with FAR
Preparation of the cost estimate is an integral 31.205-46.
part of "producing and delivering designs, plans,
drawings and specifications" and is therefore, c. Other Direct Costs. A unit cost or price
subject to the 6 percent limitation. The mandatory should be negotiated for all anticipated supplies
Design within Funding Limitation Clause (FAR (such as survey monuments) or support services
52.236-22) requires an A-E firm to design a project (such as soils tests or computer use). Unit costs or
within the construction budget. The estimate must prices may also be negotiated for specific types of
be prepared coincident with the construction services, such as a daily rate for a survey crew or
documents to guide the selection of materials, per acre rate for a topographic survey.
components, and systems and keep the project
within budget. Hence, the estimate is a necessary d. Profit. Profit will usually be negotiated
and integral part of the design process, and is not for each task order under an ID contract. However,

EP 715-1-7
31 May 99

a standard profit rate for all task orders may be 4-15. Subcontracting Plan.
established in an ID contract if all orders will be
very similar in nature, complexity, risk, price, and a. General Requirements. A Small, Small
performance period. In either case, the profit rate Disadvantaged and Women-Owned Small Business
will be applied to the total of the prime firms costs Subcontracting Plan is required for any A-E
and any subcontractors costs (without profit) to contract over $500,000 (including any options)
avoid unreasonable layering of profit (i.e., no profit with a large business if there are subcontracting
on profit). possibilities (FAR 19.702, 19.704, 19.705-2 and
52.219-8). The subcontracting plan is an element
e. Acceptance or Termination of of the negotiation process and is made a part of the
Negotiations. Agreement on every rate, such as contract. A change in subcontractors from those
labor, overhead, or travel, is not necessary. The proposed on the SF 255 must be approved by the
negotiators should consider the impact of specific KO (FAR 44.201-3(a)); see paragraph 4-7(b)(6).
rates on the prices of typical task orders anticipated
under the contract. The rates for certain b. Goals. The command subcontracting
classifications (such as a principal) may exceed the goals are considered in negotiation of
PNO but may not be significant costs in typical task subcontracting plans, but do not necessarily have
orders. If the final offer is not acceptable, to be met for the plan for an individual contract to
negotiations will be terminated similar to a FFP be acceptable. The subcontracting goals should be
contract. tailored to the specific circumstances of each
contract, including the subcontractors proposed
f. Task Orders. (and accepted) on the SF 255 and the magnitude
and nature of the work. FAR 19.705-4(c) cautions
(1) The negotiation of a FFP task order is against setting unrealistically high goals that could
very similar to a FFP contract, except that the labor significantly increase the Governments cost or
rates, overhead rates, and certain other unit costs seriously impede the attainment of acquisition
or prices (and maybe profit) are already fixed in the objectives.
ID contract. Also, there is a limitation in an ID
contract on the cumulative amount of all orders that 4-16. Price Negotiation Memorandum. The
must be considered, and possibly a limitation on the negotiators will complete the PNM (FAR 15.406-3
price of individual task orders. Negotiation typically and supplements thereto) promptly after concluding
concerns the quantity and mix of various position negotiations. A PNM will discuss the principal
classifications. A task order may be modified, have elements of the negotiation. The PNM will
options, or include work involving minor cost demonstrate that the final accepted price complies
elements that are not in the contract rate schedule. with the 6 percent statutory limitation, if applicable.
The amount of a modification (including exercise of If an audit was performed, the PNM will discuss
an option) of a task order will be counted against any deviations from the audit recommendations in
the ceiling of the contract period in which the task the final negotiated price. A PNM shall be
order was issued. prepared, reviewed and approved in accordance
with local procedures (EFARS 15.808). Ordinarily,
(2) The SOW of a task order must be within review and approval of a PNM should be concurrent
the scope of the ID contract (FAR 16.505(a)(2)). with the review and approval of the final contract
For any task order over $500,000, the contract file instrument.
must be documented to justify why a task order
was used instead of publicly announcing the
requirement (EFARS 36.601-3-90(f)). The reasons 4-17. Preaward Survey. The selection process
should relate to the basic reasons for using an ID addresses the technical capability, production
contract in EFARS 36.601-3-90(a). Also, the resources and quality assurance methods of the
contract file must be documented to justify the firm. Hence, a short-form preaward survey report
basis for issuing a task order under a particular ID (only SF 1403, Preaward Survey of Prospective
contract when the order could have been issued Contractor (General)) in accordance with FAR
under more than one ID contract (EFARS 36.601-3- 9.106-4(d) is typically adequate. The main
90(h)). Price can not be considered. emphasis of the preaward survey should be

EP 715-1-7
31 May 99

checking the financial capability of the firm through the first task order is not issued simultaneously
Dunn and Bradsteet reports, statements from the with award of the ID contract, then the minimum
firms bank, annual financial statements, or other guarantee shall be obligated7 at the time of contract
appropriate means. Also, a contractor must be award using project funds if the contract is
registered in the DoD Central Contractor customer-specific, or using the appropriate
Registration (CCR)5 to be eligible for a contract departmental overhead or revolving funds if the
(DFARS 204.73 and 252.204-7004). contract serves many customers.

4-18. Contract Preparation and Award. 4-19. Task Order Issuance. IDC task orders are
prepared using DD Form 1155, Order for Supplies
a. General. An A-E contract will be or Services (DFARS 216.506). A DD Form 1155 for
prepared using the uniform contract format in FAR an ID contract task order need only be signed by
15.204.1. The contract may state a notice to the KO or ordering officer. The DD Form 1155 is a
proceed (NTP) date or the KO may send a separate NTP.
NTP letter after contract award. If a contract is
executed by mail, the KO should sign the contract 4-20. NAF Contracts. AR 215-4 specifies the
after it has been signed by the contractor (FAR general procedures for NAF contracting. The FAR
4.101). However, if the action is urgent, an award and its supplements, including the 6 percent
letter (Appendix I) can be used, which also serves statutory limitation, do not apply. Otherwise, the
as the NTP. negotiation of an A-E contract for an NAF project
should generally comply with this pamphlet.
b. ID Contracts. In order to satisfy the
minimum contract guarantee (EFARS 16.504(a)(1)),
the best practice is to issue the first task order
using project funds at the same time the ID contract
is awarded. However, in no case will the award of
an ID contract be delayed more than 90 days after
the completion of negotiations of the contract.6 If

A firm does not have to be registered in the
CCR, nor have a Data Universal Numbering System
(DUNS) number or Commercial and Government
Entity (CAGE) code (both of which are required by
the CCR), to be considered by an A-E evaluation
board. Hence, a synopsis may request that
interested firms include their DUNS number and/or
CAGE code on their SF 255, if already assigned, 7
Immediately upon award of a task order(s) in
but not mandate that firms obtain these identifiers sufficient amount to satisfy the minimum
as a condition of submission. guarantee, the KO must deobligate the funds used
to award the ID contract. Obligation of funds to
In accordance with PARC Instruction Letter satisfy the minimum guarantee shall not be reported
97-1, subject: USACE Inspector General Report on on a DD Form 350, Individual Contracting Action
Funding of A-E Indefinite Delivery Contracts, 16 Report (Over $25,000), unless the minimum
April 1997 (originally issued as Instruction Letter guarantee is not satisfied by the end of the contract
96-11, 18 February 1997). period. See footnote 6 for reference.

EP 715-1-7
31 May 99


5-1. Introduction. This chapter addresses h. Closing out the contract.

certain, but not all, aspects of A-E contract
administration and management. Chapters 6 and 7 5-4. Contracting Officers Representative.
address in detail two other very important aspects
of A-E contract administration - evaluating a. The appointment and responsibilities of
performance and enforcing design responsibility, a COR are described in DFARS 201.602-2 and
respectively. AFARS 1.602-2-90. and 53.90011. A COR assists
the KO with technical monitoring and administration
5-2. Principles. of the contract. A COR must have the training
listed in paragraph 4-4.b as well as any other
a. A-E contracts will be proactively training specified by the KO, and have considerable
managed to ensure the timely delivery of quality experience in contract administration. There is no
products and services. regulation which precludes a Government employee
that participated in the evaluation boards for and/or
b. A-E firms will be treated fairly and negotiation of an A-E contract from being a COR on
professionally. that contract. However, the KO may impose such
restrictions if necessary to ensure the integrity of
5-3. General. The administration and the system of checks and balances.
management of an A-E contract is a team effort
among the KO, contract specialist, contracting b. A COR may be in any organizational
officers representative (COR) and other technical element2 as long as the COR is in a position to
personnel, project manager (PM), and others. The directly monitor an A-E firms performance and the
primary functions in administrating and managing system of checks and balances is maintained.
an A-E contract are: During construction, an appropriate, qualified
person in the field office may be appointed as COR
a. Monitoring the A-E firms performance, for an A-E contract, especially if the A-E firm is
ensuring compliance with the contract, and required to provide certain construction phase
enforcing the responsibility of the firm for the services3. For medical projects, the KO will appoint
quality of its work. a qualified person in CEMP-EM as COR in
accordance with ER 1110-345-721 if requested by
b. Ensuring the firm has an adequate quality CEMP-EM.
control process, and reviewing the A-E products for
conformance with the technical requirements of the
Also see PARC Instruction Letter 93-5,

c. Evaluating the firms performance. subject: Selecting, Training, Qualifying and

Appointing Contracting Officers Representatives,
d. Maintaining liaison and direct 14 October 1993.
communications with the A-E firm, and promptly
resolving any questions and issues that may arise. 2
For example, a PM may be a COR,
depending on local practices.
e. Providing required Government-furnished
information and materials, and arranging access to 3
Construction phase services include, for
work areas. example, design modifications to accommodate
unforeseen site conditions or criteria changes,
f. Paying the firm in a timely manner for review of contractor value engineering change
satisfactorily completed work. proposals, site visits to evaluate the acceptability of
completed construction or monitor certain tests,
g. Modifying the contract as required to review of shop drawings, and assistance with
accommodate changes in requirements. commissioning.

EP 715-1-7
31 May 99

5-5. Quality Management. The quality (5) Funding and payments.

management procedures, practices and tools in ER
1110-1-12 will be employed to ensure that the A-E (6) Requirement for design within the
firm delivers excellent engineering and design construction funding limitations (FAR 36.609-1).
services and products to the customer on schedule
and within budget. (7) Enforcing the responsibility and liability
of the A-E firm for design errors or deficiencies
5-6. ID Contracts. (FAR 36.608 and 36.609-2, and Chapter 7).

a. Management of Contract Limitation. An (8) Resolution of disputes.

ID contract is typically used by more than one
organizational unit. Hence, a process must be (9) Preparation of performance evaluation
established for all ID contracts to reserve an (FAR and EFARS 36.604, and Chapter 6).
estimated amount for a planned task order and to
track the actual prices of orders to ensure the limit (10) Contract documentation.
for the contract period is not exceeded.
5-7. Payments.
b. Option Periods. See EFARS 36.601-3-
90(d), (i)-(m) regarding limitations on option a. FAR 52.232-10 is the payment clause
periods, and waivers thereof. Options periods may for A-E contracts. The payment clause and process
be exercised early (EFARS 16.504(S-101)(d)(5)), should be discussed with an A-E firm during
but must be exercised before the contract expires. negotiations. The clause allows for monthly
See paragraph 4-18.b regarding the minimum progress payments. The contract (typically under
guarantee. Section D, Contract Administration Data) should
specify the format of the payment request (typically
c. Installation Use of ID Contracts. When ENG Form 93, Payment Estimate - Contractor
authorized by a USACE command, installations may Performance is used) and any required supporting
use USACE A-E ID contracts (AFARS 36.600-90 data, such as a written description of the work
and EFARS 36.601-3-90(p)). Qualified public completed in the payment period, a bar chart of
works personnel may be appointed as COR to work progress, and example work products.
administer orders. Also, if mutually agreed
between USACE and the installation, an installation b. The PM, COR and/or other technical staff
KO may be appointed as an ordering officer to issue may also visit the A-E firms office to verify
task orders. In any case, the USACE KO shall progress. The COR will reduce the payment
provide written instructions to the installation KO estimate, if warranted, to conform to the actual
and facilities engineering personnel regarding the satisfactory progress and promptly notify the A-E
limitations and procedures for the negotiation, firm in accordance with the prompt payment clause
issuance and administration of task order. These (FAR 52.232-26). Typically, the KO delegates the
instructions will address USACE and installation authority to approve progress payments to the
responsibilities, and include: COR. However, the KO usually approves the final
(1) SOW preparation.
c. The payment clause allows for up to 10
(2) Requirements for preparation of an IGE percent of an approved progress payment to be
(FAR and EFARS 36.605, and Appendix S). retained to protect the interests of the Government.
However, retainage should not be automatically
(3) Negotiation procedures, including withheld from each payment if the PM and COR is
compliance with the 6 percent statutory limitation certain of the progress and the quality of the
(DFARS 236.606-70). Also indicate that any failure completed work. Retainage should not be held in
to reach agreement must be referred to the USACE an amount greater than, or for a period longer than,
KO. absolutely needed to protect the Government. All
retainage should be paid when discrete phases of
(4) Preparation of the DD Form 1155. the project are satisfactorily completed. Retainage

EP 715-1-7
31 May 99

shall never be applied in a punitive manner. Also f. Meeting between the firm and the KO
see the guidance in FAR 32.103 which is equally and PM and/or COR. Document in the contract file.
applicable to A-E contracts.
g. A cure notice to the firm from the KO
5-8. Subcontract Reporting. A contractor must (FAR 49.402-3(c) and (d)). The cure notice must
report semiannually on its progress in complying cite the specific deficiencies, required corrective
with the subcontracting goals agreed to in the actions, and suspense date.
subcontracting plan using SF 294, Subcontracting
Report for Individual Contracts, and SF 295, h. A show cause notice to the firm from the
Summary Subcontract Report (FAR Clause 52.219- KO (FAR 49.402-3(e)), notifying the firm of the
9). The contract administration team must ensure possibility of termination.
that the A-E firm makes a good faith effort to
comply with the subcontracting plan and submits i. A final "marginal" or unsatisfactory
the required reports to the KO in a timely manner. performance evaluation.
Compliance with the subcontracting plan is an
attribute on the A-E performance evaluation form. j. Termination for default (FAR 49.4),
which shall always be accompanied by a final
5-9. Resolving Performance Problems. Proactive unsatisfactory performance evaluation.
day-to-day oversight of an A-E contract by the PM,
COR and/or other technical staff, including frequent Also, see Chapter 7 regarding an A-E firm's
communications with the firm, will prevent most responsibility for errors or deficiencies in design or
A-E performance problems. However, the A-E firm other services discovered after completion of the
must be promptly advised whenever its contract work.
performance is marginal or unsatisfactory. If
performance continues to be marginal or 5-10. Contract Closeout.
unsatisfactory, the Government shall take stronger
action to improve the firms performance. The a. An A-E contract must be closed out
following methods, in general order of increasing promptly after satisfactory completion and delivery
impact and severity, should be used to resolve A-E of all required services and products. However, in
performance problems: the case of an A-E contract for the design of a
particular construction project, A-E services are
a. Verbal notice to the firm by the COR. often required during the construction period that
Document in the contract file. can not be definitively anticipated or priced when
the contract is awarded (or even when the design
b. Letter to the firm from the COR citing is completed). The A-E contract should typically
specific deficiencies and required corrective action. remain open to readily accommodate these potential
c. Meeting between the firm and the COR,
PM. Document in the contract file. b. In order to preserve the Governments
ability to add work during the construction period
d. Meeting between the firm and the Chief that can not be quantified or priced at the time of
of Engineering. Inform the firm that an interim the award of the original contract, the synopsis and
marginal or unsatisfactory performance the scope of an A-E contract for the design of a
evaluation will be prepared if its performance does particular project should include a statement that
not promptly improve, and that this evaluation additional work is contemplated (list the types of
could affect its selection for other contracts. possible services such as in the footnote 2) during
Document in the contract file. the construction period and may be added pursuant
to the Changes clause (FAR 52.243-1, Alternate
e. An interim marginal or unsatisfactory III). It is not acceptable to withhold earned
performance evaluation in accordance with the payment from a firm as a means to keep the
procedures in Chapter 6. contract open.

EP 715-1-7
31 May 99

c. FAR 4.804 provides general procedures approved and distributed.

for contract closeout. For an A-E contract, the
following additional actions are required: (3) Return of all Government-furnished
(1) All liability actions resolved.
(4) Release of claims executed.
(2) Performance evaluation(s) prepared,

EP 715-1-7
31 May 99


6-1. Principles. a. FAR 36.604, which requires that the

performance of A-E contractors be evaluated and
a. Accurate and timely performance that files of performance evaluations be maintained
evaluations support the USACE objective of for use in selecting firms for A-E contracts,
continuously improving the quality of A-E services
and products. b. DFARS 236.604, which requires a
separate performance evaluation after completion of
b. The performance of A-E firms shall be construction and specifies that all DoD agencies
evaluated fairly and objectively. Ratings are forward completed evaluations to the central
ultimately the decision of the Government and are automated database maintained by USACE
not subject to negotiation with A-E firms. (ACASS), and
However, overall ratings1 of "marginal" and
"unsatisfactory" may be rebutted by A-E firms in c. EFARS 36.604, which amplifies certain
accordance with the procedures herein. requirements of the FAR and DFARS.

c. A-E firms shall be kept apprised of the 6-4. General Procedures.

quality of their work throughout contract
performance and shall promptly be sent copies of a. Implementation. The Chief of
completed performance evaluations. Engineering will establish written procedures,
including a tracking system, to ensure the timely
6-2. Responsibilities. preparation, approval and distribution of all required
A-E evaluations in accordance with this pamphlet.
a. The Chief of Engineering in each A-E evaluations shall be scheduled events in the
operating command is responsible for the A-E management plan for a project.
performance evaluation process in the command.
b. Contracts Requiring Performance
b. Area engineers and resident engineers Evaluation. Performance evaluations are required
(AE/RE) are responsible for preparing A-E for all contracts for A-E services in excess of
evaluations after the completion of USACE- $25,000, but may be prepared for lesser contracts
managed construction projects. (FAR 36.604 (a)). Design services provided under
a design-build contract are not given an A-E
6-3. Regulatory Background. This pamphlet performance evaluation and are not subject to this
implements2: pamphlet. Instead, the quality of the design
services in a design-build contract will be addressed
in the remarks section on the construction
performance evaluation form (DD Form 2626).
This pamphlet is based on the April 1999
edition of DD Form 2631, Performance Evaluation c. Preparation of Evaluations.
(Architect-Engineer), which replaced the November
1992 edition. The new overall ratings are (1) A performance evaluation shall be
exceptional, very good, satisfactory, prepared by the engineers, architects and other
marginal and unsatisfactory. The 1992 edition technical personnel who reviewed and accepted the
of the form had corresponding overall ratings of A-E firm's work as recommended by FAR 36.604
excellent, above average, average, below (a)(1). Sufficient effort must be devoted to this
average and poor. function so that thorough and fair evaluations are
completed in a timely manner.
FAR Subpart 42.15, and the supplements
thereto, addresses recording and maintaining (2) Performance evaluations (except
contractor performance information, but, by its marginal or unsatisfactory) shall be prepared,
terms, does not apply to A-E services. reviewed, approved and distributed within 60 days

EP 715-1-7
31 May 99

of the designated milestones in paragraphs 6-7 and required in order to get an acceptable product.
6-8. Additional time will generally be required for
evaluations with an overall rating of marginal or (5) "Unsatisfactory." Several significant
unsatisfactory if rebutted by the A-E firm (see disciplines and attributes are rated "unsatisfactory."
paragraph 6-10). This rating is appropriate for a firm that does not
produce acceptable work despite extensive effort
d. Evaluation Form. Performance by the Government. This rating is required for all
evaluations shall be prepared on DD Form 26313 contracts terminated for default.
(DFARS 236.604(a)) in accordance with the
instructions in Appendix V. The performance f. Remarks. The remarks in Item 20 of the
evaluation software provided by the Contractor DD Form 2631 should support and be compatible
Appraisal Information Center will be used instead of with the overall rating. A rating of marginal or
the actual form to facilitate the preparation and unsatisfactory must be fully explained in the
routing of evaluations, as well as the transmittal remarks. Also, the remarks should not suggest that
and entry into ACASS. A hard copy must be the firm really did marginal work when the overall
printed and signed by the rating and reviewing rating is satisfactory.
officials for inclusion in the contract file and for
sending to the A-E firm. g. Safeguarding Evaluations. Completed
A-E performance evaluations are classified as "For
e. Assignment of Overall Ratings. The Official Use Only" in accordance with AR 25-55.
overall rating is based on the ratings in the All pages of the evaluation shall be stamped or
discipline and attribute matrices. While this is a marked at the top and bottom "For Official Use
matter of judgment, general guidance is given Only in accordance with the provisions of AR 25-
below to promote uniformity. 55, Section 2, Markings. A firm's evaluations will
only be given to proper representatives of the firm,
(1) "Exceptional. All or almost all of the to representatives of a Federal agency having a
significant disciplines and attributes are rated legitimate need for this information, and to ACASS.
"exceptional." No discipline or attribute should be
marginal or "unsatisfactory." h. Contract Negotiation. The performance
evaluation form and procedures shall be discussed
(2) "Very Good." A majority of the with an A-E firm during contract negotiation
significant disciplines and attributes are rated (EFARS 36.604(a) and paragraph 4-7.b). The
"exceptional" or very good. No significant Government will clearly describe its performance
discipline or attribute should be marginal or expectations, and stress the importance of the
"unsatisfactory." performance evaluation in future selections. The
PNM will indicate that this discussion took place.
(3) "Satisfactory." No significant discipline
or attribute should be "unsatisfactory." Quality of i. A-E Office Location. Enter in Item 6 of
final work is acceptable in an overall sense, the DD Form 2631 the A-E office location which
however, it may have been necessary to get the had the lead role in performing the work, which
firm to correct some unacceptable work. may not be the office which signed the contract.
The evaluation will not be useful or relevant in
(4) "Marginal." One or two significant future selections if it does not reflect the actual
disciplines or attributes are rated "unsatisfactory," performing office.
or all or almost disciplines or attributes are rated
marginal. An unusual amount of extra effort and k. Responsible Command. When more than
follow-up on the part of the Government was one command is involved in the execution of a
project, the command having KO authority for
administration of the A-E contract is responsible for
preparation of the A-E performance evaluation. The
The ACASS software presently conforms
responsibility for the A-E performance evaluation
to the November 1992 edition of DD Form 2631. will be included in the overall management plan for
This software will continue to be used until it is the project (see ER 5-1-11).
updated to reflect the current edition of the form.

EP 715-1-7
31 May 99

prepared under the following conditions, in

l. A-E Contracts Awarded for Installations. accordance with the procedures in paragraph 6.7.c:

(1) This chapter also applies to A-E (1) A cumulative, interim evaluation will be
contracts awarded by USACE for administration by prepared at least annually for a task order or a FP or
Army installations or other activities. As required CR contract with a performance period anticipated
by paragraph 5-6.c, the USACE KO will issue to exceed 18 months (EFARS 36.604(S-102)).
instructions to the installation on the preparation of
performance evaluations, including preparation of (2) An interim evaluation will be prepared
the A-E evaluation after completion of construction whenever a project is deferred for more than 3
when the installation is responsible for managing months if a substantial portion of the work has
the construction contract. been completed.

(2) If a person at the installation has COR (3) An interim evaluation will be prepared
authority for the A-E contract, this person may act when a firms performance is marginal or
as the rating official. Otherwise, the chief of the unsatisfactory (EFARS 36.604(a)(3)) after
unit in the Directorate of Public Works or similar reasonable steps have been taken by the
engineering office charged with the oversight Government to improve the firms performance (see
responsibility for the A-E contract will act as the paragraph 5-9). An interim evaluation formally puts
rating official. The reviewing official will be the a firm on notice that its performance is inadequate
Chief, or Assistant Chief, of Engineering of the in order to encourage improvement and to make the
supporting USACE district. information on the firms performance available to
other contracting offices in a timely manner. An
6-5. Monitoring Performance. interim marginal or unsatisfactory evaluation
provides a very strong basis for a final marginal
a. General. The quality of an A-E firms or unsatisfactory evaluation (see paragraph 6-10)
products and services must be adequately if a firms performance does not improve.
documented throughout the performance of the
contract and the firm kept apprised of the quality of (4) At any other appropriate time.
its work (EFARS 36.604(a)). An A-E firm will be
notified immediately upon recognition of marginal b. Approval and Distribution. Interim
or unsatisfactory performance as outlined in evaluations will be approved and distributed in
paragraph 5-9. accordance with paragraph 6-9. The basis for an
interim marginal or unsatisfactory evaluation
b. Appraisals. Operating commands shall must be well documented. An interim marginal
establish procedures to appraise the quality of each or unsatisfactory evaluation is subject to the
A-E submittal, using the discipline and attribute rebuttal process in paragraph 6-10, and will not be
matrices on the DD Form 2631. The appraisals will distributed until the rebuttal process is completed
be supplemented as appropriate with narrative that (EFARS 36.604(a)(4)). Interim evaluations that
supports the rating and will assist the PM and COR have been transmitted to ACASS will be replaced
in communications with the A-E on submittal by the final evaluation. Any interim marginal or
quality. These appraisals will be made by each of unsatisfactory evaluations and a summary of any
the pertinent disciplines. It is particularly important actions the firm took to remedy the deficiencies
to adequately document any area of unsatisfactory shall be recorded in Item 20, "Remarks" of the final
or exceptional performance. These appraisals evaluation.
constitute the basis for interim and final
performance evaluations and shall be retained in the 6-7. Evaluation of A-E Performance after
contract files. Completion of Design or Engineering Services.

6-6. Interim Evaluations. a. General. A final evaluation will be

prepared for each task order or FP or CR contract
a. General. An interim performance exceeding $25,000 (EFARS 36.604(S-101)). For
evaluation (FAR and EFARS 36.604(a)(3)) will be engineering services not directly related to design,

EP 715-1-7
31 May 99

the evaluation shall be prepared after acceptance of evaluation, with any supporting documentation,
the A-E products. For design services, the will be forwarded through the Chief of Construction
evaluation shall be prepared after the construction to the Engineering Division.
bid opening, provided the bid opening is scheduled
to occur within 3 months of design completion. c. Review and Approval. Engineering
Otherwise, the evaluation will be prepared after Division will promptly review and approve an A-E
completion of the design. construction evaluation after receipt from the
Construction Division. No changes will be made in
b. Preparation. The final performance the A-E construction evaluation without the
evaluation will be based on the appraisals prepared concurrence of the AE/RE, design COR and PM.
by the technical reviewers and input received from
the PM and customer, as well as any interim (1) Any significant differences in assessment
evaluations. The COR will assign the overall rating between the design and construction evaluations
and sign the form as the rating official. A copy of will be resolved. This may require reevaluation of
the evaluation will be sent to the PM when the some aspects of the design by the personnel who
evaluation is forwarded for approval. reviewed the A-E firm's work during the design
phase. Particular attention should be given to
c. Contract Termination. A performance discipline or attribute ratings which could possibly
evaluation shall be prepared for a task order or a FP reflect a misunderstanding of the A-E firm's
or CR contract terminated for any reason prior to responsibility. Any questions of this nature should
completion of the work if the value of services be discussed with the AE/RE and the construction
completed at termination exceeds $25,000 or if the modification file reviewed, if necessary.
contract was terminated for default.
(2) As a consequence of the A-E
6-8. Evaluation of A-E Performance after construction evaluation, or other factors,
Completion of Construction. Engineering Division may wish to change some of
the ratings given for disciplines or attributes in the
a. General. An evaluation (referred to design evaluation. If so, the matrices on page 2 of
herein as the A-E construction evaluation) shall be the A-E construction evaluation, applying to
prepared after substantial physical completion of design/engineering services, shall be completed and
each construction project based on an A-E design a statement made in Item 20, "Remarks," giving the
where the price of the A-E services (performed by reason for the change. If Engineering Division
task order or FP or CR contract) exceeds $25,000 wishes to change the overall rating on the design
(EFARS 36.604(S-101)). evaluation, a revised evaluation will be prepared and
transmitted to ACASS as specified in paragraph 6-
b. Preparation. 9.c(1). A statement shall be made in Item 20,
"Remarks," giving the reason(s) for the revision.
(1) During construction, the AE/RE is
responsible for assessing the accuracy and e. Review of A-E Liability. The COR will
completeness of the A-E firms work and its obtain the A-E liability information for Item 11 of
responsiveness in resolving design problems that the DD Form 2631 from the A-E Responsibility
arise during construction. Sufficient documentation Coordinator (AERC). Refer to the instructions in
will be maintained by the AE/RE to support the A-E Appendix V. An updated evaluation will be
construction evaluation. Use of the discipline and transmitted to ACASS as specified in paragraph 6-
attribute matrices on the DD Form 2631 can assist 9.c(2) if there is a later change in the A-E liability
in documenting performance during construction information. Completion of an evaluation shall not
and in communicating with the A-E firm on design be delayed because liability determinations have not
problems. The AE/RE will coordinate the evaluation been resolved.
with the design COR and PM.
6-9. Approval, Distribution and Revision of
(2) T he AE/RE will prepare the A-E Evaluations.
construction evaluation, assign the overall rating,
and sign the form as the rating official. The a. Approval. The reviewing official for A-E

EP 715-1-7
31 May 99

performance evaluations shall be the Chief or A-E contract file. The Contractor Appraisal
Assistant Chief of Engineering, unless a proposed Information Center will make the requested
marginal or unsatisfactory evaluation is changes.
rebutted (see paragraph 6-10). The reviewing
official will review the performance evaluation and 6-10. Marginal and Unsatisfactory Performance.
the supporting documentation to assure that the
overall rating is justified. The date of the reviewing a. General. This section implements FAR
official's signature is the official date of the and EFARS 36.604(a)(4).
b. Documentation. Documentation of
b. Distribution. marginal or unsatisfactory performance must be
adequate to support the performance rating. It is
(1) The original signed copy of each interim very important to document the steps taken by the
and final performance evaluation shall be placed in Government to get the A-E firm to improve
the A-E contract file. Performance evaluations will performance (see paragraph 5-9), and the A-E
be promptly transmitted electronically to ACASS, firm's responses. Records should be made of all
except when rebutted by the A-E firm in accordance telephone conversations and meetings with the A-E
with paragraph 6-10. firm concerning performance. Generally, a final
marginal or unsatisfactory evaluation should
(2) A copy of each interim and final have been preceded by an interim marginal or
performance evaluation will be promptly sent to the unsatisfactory evaluation.
A-E firm. The cover correspondence may be signed
by the COR, except for "marginal" or c. Preparation and Notification.
"unsatisfactory" ratings, which shall be signed by
the KO. (1) A performance evaluation will be
prepared documenting the marginal or
c. Revisions and Corrections. unsatisfactory performance, but not signed by the
rating and reviewing officials. A summary of the
(1) A performance evaluation may be deficiencies will be given in Item 20, "Remarks."
changed by the reviewing official, or successor, The KO will send a letter to the A-E firm notifying
upon presentation of adequate evidence. However, it of the intended rating and enclosing the proposed
no changes shall be made in an A-E construction evaluation and supporting documentation.
evaluation without concurrence of the AE/RE. A
statement must be included in Item 20, "Remarks," (2) The A-E firm will be advised in the letter
describing the change and explaining why it was that it has 30 days to rebut the rating. The A-E
made. firm will be advised of its right to have comments
entered in Item 20, "Remarks," of the evaluation
(2) The revised evaluation, highlighted in form in accordance with FAR 36.604(a)(4). If the
colored marker to show the changes, will be sent to A-E firm does not respond in writing within the
the ACASS, accompanied by a memorandum signed allotted time, the evaluation will be finalized and
by the reviewing official. The revised evaluation distributed.
will also be sent to the A-E firm and included in the
A-E contract file. The Contractor Appraisal d. Rebuttal Process.
Information Center will make the requested
changes. (1) If an A-E firm rebuts a rating, a meeting
will be scheduled with the Commander or Deputy
(3) An evaluation may be updated to change Commander. The firm will be advised of the fact-
factual information (such as Items 9, 10 or 11) or finding nature of this meeting and provided with the
correct obvious clerical errors without the approval evidence that will be submitted to the Commander
of the reviewing official. A copy of the evaluation for consideration. Every effort will be made to fully
will be marked-up to show the changes and sent to explore the major performance deficiencies in the
the ACASS. The updated or corrected evaluation meeting to enable the Commander to make a
will also be sent to the A-E firm and included in the decision without the need for additional meetings or

EP 715-1-7
31 May 99

evidence. The firm will be given sufficient time to District Commander, to the maximum extent
prepare for this meeting. The meeting with the possible.
Commander will be held within 30 days of the
firm's rebuttal letter, to the maximum extent (5) The MSC Commander will decide
possible. whether to support or change the "unsatisfactory"
rating assigned by the District Commander. If the
(2) Following the meeting with the A-E firm, MSC Commander decides not to change the rating,
the Commander will decide whether to support or the contract file will be documented to show the
change the proposed rating. If the Commander reason(s). The KO will send a letter to the A-E firm
decides to change the rating, the contract file will advising of the MSC Commanders decision and
be documented to show the reason(s). If the firm that the unsatisfactory evaluation is final.
has submitted any written comments, they will be
added to Item 20, "Remarks." The evaluation will (6) If the MSC Commander decides that the
be signed by the rating official, and the Commander unsatisfactory rating should be changed, the
shall sign as the reviewing official. performance evaluation will be revised and signed
by the rating official. The MSC Commander will
(3) The KO will send a letter to the A-E firm sign as the reviewing official. The KO will send a
advising of the Commanders decision and letter to the A-E firm with a copy of the final
enclosing the signed evaluation. If the rating is revised evaluation.
"marginal," the letter will notify the firm that the
decision is final. If the rating is "unsatisfactory," (7) For Centers, the role of the District
the firm will be advised that it can further rebut the Commander will be filled by the Director of
evaluation to the MSC Commander, and, if so, that Engineering and Technical Services (DETS), or
it must respond within 15 days of the date of comparable position. Rebuttals of a
receipt of the letter. "unsatisfactory" rating are made to the Center
(4) If a firm rebuts an "unsatisfactory"
rating, the MSC Commander will be briefed prior to (8) Performance evaluations that are
the meeting with the A-E firm. The meeting rebutted by A-E firms will not be transmitted to
between the MSC Commander and the A-E firm will ACASS until the above rebuttal process is
be held within 30 days of the meeting with the completed (EFARS 36.604(a)(4)).

EP 715-1-7
31 May 99


7-1. Introduction. This chapter addresses actions h. Only the KO can accept a liability
to be taken from the discovery of an A-E error or settlement for the Government or relieve an A-E
deficiency to the issuance of a final contracting firm of its liability.
officer's decision (COD) against the A-E firm under
FAR 52.233-1, the contract "Disputes" clause. 7-3. Responsibilities.
Subsequent action is covered by FAR 33.2,
Disputes and Appeals. a. MSC. The DETS is responsible for
overseeing the AERMP in subordinate districts to
7-2. Principles. ensure timeliness, cost-effectiveness, and
compliance with this pamphlet. The DETS will
a. An A-E firm is responsible for the quality appoint an MSC AERC. The AERC will provide day-
of its products and services and is liable for to-day oversight of the AERMP, and be the point of
damages to the Government caused by its contact with the districts and HQUSACE.
negligence or breach of contractual duty. The A-E
Responsibility Management Program (AERMP) is a b. Operating Commands.
formal process for holding A-E firms accountable
for their work and recovering damages to the (1) A-E Responsibility Administrator (AERA).
Government caused by A-E firms. The Chief, or Assistant Chief, of Engineering (or
comparable position) will be the AERA. The AERA
b. The goals of the AERMP are to: is responsible for the timeliness, cost-effectiveness,
reasonableness and fairness of the AERMP, and
(1) Maintain and improve the quality of A-E compliance with this pamphlet. The AERA will
services and products. appoint a command AERC in the engineering
organization. The AERC will be a very experienced
(2) Hold A-E firms responsible for their work engineer or architect who has the training specified
and recover damages to the Government resulting in paragraph 4-4.b of this pamphlet. The AERC will
from negligence or breach of contractual duty. be responsible for the day-to-day management of
the AERMP and be the point of contact with the
c. The AERMP will be conducted in a fair, MSC.
consistent, and reasonable manner.
(2) A-E Responsibility Management Review
d. No demand for recovery of damages will Board (AERRB). The commander of each operating
be made to an A-E firm without an adequate review command will establish an AERRB to review
of the facts and circumstances. deficiencies in A-E performance when requested by
the AERC or the KO and advise on appropriate
e. Investigations and recovery actions will action. The AERA shall chair the AERRB and the
be pursued in a cost-effective and timely manner to voting members will include at least senior
mitigate damages, minimize administrative costs, representatives from Construction, Programs and
strengthen the likelihood for full recovery, and allow Project Management, and Counsel.
the reuse of project funds.
c. Change in Responsible USACE
f. Recovery of damages will only be Command. When the design and construction of a
pursued when economically justified or otherwise in project are performed by different USACE
the best interest of the Government. commands, the USACE command having KO
authority for the A-E contract ("design" command)
g. A reasonable effort will be made to will be responsible for the AERMP, including
resolve liability actions through negotiation. If reporting. The "design" command is responsible
negotiation is unsuccessful, other alternative for developing a memorandum of understanding
dispute resolution (ADR) techniques should be with the "construction" command on how the
considered. requirements of this chapter will be met.

EP 715-1-7
31 May 99

7-4. Legal and Regulatory Background. d. The following legal principles should be
considered when deciding if an A-E firm is liable:
a. All FP contracts and ID contracts with FP
task orders for A-E services must incorporate FAR (1) Negligence. Negligence is the failure to
clause 52.236-23, Responsibility of the Architect- meet the standard of reasonable care, skill and
Engineer Contractor, which stipulates that: diligence that one in the A-E profession would
ordinarily exercise under similar circumstances
(1) The A-E firm shall be responsible for the
professional quality, technical accuracy, and (2) Burden of Proof. In order for the
coordination of all designs, specifications, and other Government to prevail in a claim against an A-E
services it furnishes. firm, it must be able to prove that the firm was
negligent and that the error or omission by the A-E
(2) The A-E firm shall, without additional firm was the cause of the damages.
compensation, correct or revise any errors or
deficiencies in its work. (3) Comparative Negligence. The doctrine of
comparative negligence provides that the
(3) The Governments review, approval or Government is not barred from any recovery of
acceptance of the A-E services is not a waiver of damages if it is also negligent, but that there will be
any of the Governments rights. an apportionment of damages or responsibility in
proportion to the relative fault of the parties
(4) The A-E firm shall be and remain liable involved.
for all damages to the Government caused by its
negligent performance. (4) Mitigation. The Government has a
responsibility for minimizing damages resulting from
b. Typical examples of A-E liability are an A-E firm's deficiencies. The firm must be
when, due to an A-E design error or deficiency, notified promptly when a deficiency is discovered
modification of an ongoing construction contract is by the Government and provided a reasonable
required or there is a failure after construction. An opportunity to correct its work.
A-E firm may also be liable for Government
damages arising from failure to design within the (5) Government Assumption of Risk. An
funding limitations (FAR 36.609-1 and 52.236-22) A-E firm may be relieved of responsibility for a
or to comply with the contract schedule or technical design deficiency due to action by the Government,
provisions. In all such instances, FAR 36.608 such as if the Government corrects the design
directs the KO to consider the extent to which the deficiency without the concurrence of the A-E firm
architect-engineer contractor may be reasonably and the corrected design is the cause of a failure.
liable, and to enforce the liability and collect the
amount due, if the recoverable cost will exceed the e. The Government is entitled to seek
administrative cost involved or is otherwise in the recovery of damages resulting from any type of
Governments interest. negligence, non-performance, or breach of contract
terms. It is not necessary that the deficiency be
c. Each of the following three questions corrected for the Government to recover damages.
must be answered affirmatively for an A-E firm to It is only necessary to show that the Government
be liable for damages: has incurred damages, or will in the future
(diminished value theory).
(1) Did the firm make an error or omission?
f. FAR 36.608 allows economic factors to
(2) Did the error or omission result from the be considered when deciding whether to initiate an
firm's negligence, or from a breach of contractual A-E liability case. However, it may be in the
duty? Government's interest to initiate a case where the
administrative costs could exceed the anticipated
(3) Has the Government suffered damages recovery, such as a small claim arising from a
as a result of the error or omission? serious error that could have resulted in much larger
monetary damages or personal injury. All the

EP 715-1-7
31 May 99

circumstances of each case must be considered with the appropriate parties when suspense dates
when deciding whether to pursue A-E liability. are not met. The AERA will periodically review
liability cases to ensure their timely progress.
g. It is possible to be overly zealous in the
pursuit of A-E liability. It is not in the 7-6. Funding.
Government's best interest to make claims for
relatively small damages due to minor errors that a. The AERMP is a team effort. While
would probably not support a claim of negligence Engineering Division is the lead in administration of
before a board or court. This could lead to the A-E this program, the PM, Contracting, Counsel,
community regarding such claims as a cost of doing Construction Division, Resource Management (RM)
business with USACE, with attendant increases in and other team members must be continually
price proposals, diminution of the Corps' involved. The PM will be kept apprised of A-E
professional image, and fewer firms willing to work liability actions so the PM may control, allocate
for USACE. and/or obtain funds and keep the customer
informed. Also, the AERC will coordinate with the
7-5. Implementation. PM and RM to keep the project account open until
all A-E liability actions are resolved. This will
a. Command Implementation. Each USACE facilitate funding of the costs to pursue recovery of
command will issue written procedures damages, as well as allow crediting the project
implementing the AERMP in the command. account with monies received in settlements.

b. Installation Support. The USACE KO b. The AERC will request that the PM take
retains responsibility for certain aspects of the appropriate action to ensure that detailed project
administration of A-E contracts awarded for use by cost records are maintained for each A-E liability
Army installations, including the investigation and case, starting when it is apparent that a liability
enforcement of liability and resolution of contract case will be initiated. These cost records must
disputes. In accordance with paragraph 5-6.c, the include all costs associated with investigation,
USACE KO will provide written instructions to the deliberation and prosecution of the case, including
installation regarding the AERMP, including support costs incurred by the Office Counsel such
notification of the A-E firm, obtaining a corrective as for travel, expert witnesses, and deposition
design, funding, and preparation of damage expenses. (Office of Counsel labor costs are
statements and findings-of-fact. funded as general and administrative overhead.)

c. Program Cost Effectiveness. The AERA c. General administration of the AERMP,

will periodically review the cost-effectiveness of such as AERRB meetings and reporting, will be
liability investigations and recovery actions to funded by the Engineering departmental overhead
ensure that the technical and administrative effort account.
is commensurate with the damages recovered. In
particular, the AERA will review the Efficiency Ratio d. Planning and design funds for military
and Settlement Ratio, as defined and reported on construction projects, and appropriate project funds
ENG Form 4858A-R (see paragraph 7-9.b(1)), for for other types of projects, will be used to
each liability case. investigate and pursue A-E liability actions which
occur during planning or design.
d. Schedule. A-E liability cases must be
pursued in a timely manner to mitigate the damages e. For a project under construction, the
and strengthen the likelihood for full recovery. initial investigation and documentation of A-E
Also, since recoveries can be credited to the project liability and damages by Construction Division will
if the appropriation is open, quick action is highly be charged to the Supervision & Administration
desirable if the damages are significant. The AERC (S&A) account. Thereafter, project contingency
will establish an appropriate schedule for each case funds will be used to investigate and pursue A-E
(depending on dollar value, complexity, and other liability.
pertinent considerations), closely track the
Government and A-E firm's actions, and follow-up

EP 715-1-7
31 May 99

f. During the design or construction of a notification should be made by telephone

project, the AERC will request additional project immediately and formal notification will be made
funds from the PM when necessary to investigate soon after by letter. The AE/RE will also
or pursue A-E liability. The request will give an immediately coordinate directly with the Engineering
explanation of the design deficiencies and damages, Division and the PM on significant design
breakdown of estimated costs, discussion of deficiencies discovered during construction. All
likelihood of recovery and expected amount of contacts with an A-E firm will be fully documented.
(2) Engineering Division will review the
g. The PM will request additional funds corrective design when appropriate, such as when
from the customer, if warranted. The decision to significant structural or life safety features are
request and expend project funds to pursue A-E involved. The Engineering Division review will be
liability will consider the amount of the damages, performed promptly to avoid or minimize
the likelihood of recovery, whether the settlement construction contract delays.
will be received in time to benefit the customers
project or program (see paragraph 7-7.n and b. Corrective Design by the Government.
Appendix Y, paragraph 3), and the customers If the A-E firm is unresponsive or cannot furnish a
willingness to provide the funding. However, only corrective design within an acceptable time period,
the KO can finally decide not to pursue A-E liability the Government may have to provide the redesign.
(FAR 36.608) due to funding constraints. (See ER 1110-1-8152 regarding documenting
design changes.) If so, the firm will be formally
h. For a completed project where project notified of its liability for the redesign cost and be
funds are no longer available, the appropriate kept informed of the Government actions. The firm
departmental overhead account (usually should be requested to concur in the corrective
Engineering) will be used to investigate and pursue action taken by the Government or should sign a
A-E liability. release. A statement shall be prepared for the
contract file in accordance with FAR 36.609-2 if no
7-7. Notification, Investigation and Recovery action is taken against an A-E firm to recover
Procedures. Appendix W is a graphic depiction of redesign costs.
the A-E liability process. Each step is discussed
below. c. Implementation of Corrective
Construction. An A-E firm shall not be permitted to
a. Notification and Corrective Design. perform construction required to correct design
deficiencies by any means, including the use of its
(1) The A-E firm will be promptly notified1 as or the Governments contractors. The Government
soon as a design deficiency is discovered, may invite the A-E firm, as an advisor, to attend
requested to provide a corrective design,2 and negotiations with the construction contractor on
informed that it may be financially liable. Initial changes due to A-E design deficiencies.

d. Documentation of Deficiency. The

discovery of a design deficiency and the early
Notification will be made by a person actions taken by the Government will be promptly
identified in the A-E contract, such as the AE/RE, and adequately documented. Include a thorough
COR or PM. description of the deficiency, record of contacts
with the A-E firm and its responses, the persons
There are instances where obtaining a involved, actions taken, potential witnesses, and
corrective design from an A-E firm may not be photographs, when appropriate. The AE/RE will
necessary, such as when the correction is obvious evaluate each design error or deficiency using the
and simple or the damages are minimal. But see conditions in paragraph 7-4.c, determine if the firm
paragraph 7-4.d(4) regarding the Government is not liable or is potentially liable, and document
assumption of risk. In such cases, notification is the contract file accordingly. The AE/RE will
not required, however the A-E firm must still forward all potential instances of A-E liability to the
receive an information copy of the construction AERC for further investigation.
contract modification.

EP 715-1-7
31 May 99

e. Determination of Damages. If an A-E including the contract under review.

firm is potentially liable for a design error or
deficiency, the AE/RE will compute the initial (6) Statement on the support and
estimate of damages. Damages are the additional cooperation which the A-E firm provided during
costs that the Government has incurred, or will construction.
incur in the future, due to an A-E firm's design
errors or performance deficiencies. Appendix X (7) Any comments or information provided
provides detailed guidance on determining damages. by the A-E firm regarding its liability.
The damages will be revised as needed.
(8) Recommendation for action.
f. Investigation of Liability. The AERC will
coordinate the investigation of potential instances h. Letter of Intent. After the case
of A-E liability. The investigation will be conducted document is prepared, the AERC will send a letter
by qualified design professionals of the appropriate to the A-E firm (with a copy to the PM and the
disciplines who are familiar with the scope of the design COR) indicating the AERCs intent to
A-E contract. These persons must be capable of recommend formal review by the AERRB of the
serving as credible Government experts if a liability firms liability for damages. The letter will include
case is eventually litigated. The investigation will any documents supporting the Governments
be documented in a findings-of-fact which will: position and a detailed statement of damages. The
firm will be invited to present information on its
(1) Explicitly define the errors or omissions position and to negotiate a settlement. A liability
by the A-E firm, including specific references to case is initiated when the letter of intent is sent.
drawings, specifications, design criteria, review Interest is not assessable until, and if, a demand
comments, and other pertinent documents. letter is issued by the KO. In some instances it may
be appropriate to issue a demand letter at this stage
(2) List the applicable contract provisions (see paragraph 7-7.l(3)).
and any subsequent direction or guidance that
might bear on the question of responsibility. i. Negotiation by AERC. The AERC may
directly negotiate a liability settlement with an A-E
(3) Give an opinion on the A-E firm's firm without first presenting the case to the AERRB
responsibility and negligence. and without the KO issuing a demand letter, if the
AERC has been previously authorized to do so by
If the investigation concludes that the A-E firm is the KO3. The AERC will then present the case and
not liable for damages, the AERC will document the proposed settlement to the KO for approval, and to
findings-of-fact accordingly and forward to the Counsel and any other appropriate offices (which
AERRB for concurrence. The findings-of-fact will may include the AERRB) for concurrence. The
be included in the contract file. settlement will be reported in accordance with
paragraph 7-9. If negotiation is unsuccessful, the
g. Preparation of Case Document. If the AERC will present the case to the AERRB.
investigation concludes that an A-E firm is liable
(but see paragraph 7-7.j for small actions), the j. Small Errors or Deficiencies. If there are
AERC will prepare a case document to include: no compelling non-economic reasons, the
consideration of small errors or deficiencies
(1) Project background and schedule. (typically below $2,500 - $5,000, depending on the
size of the contract) may be deferred until their total
(2) Computation of damages. number and/or total damages warrants recovery.
The AERC will periodically review the deferred
(3) Findings-of-fact on liability. liability actions on each contract to see if aggregate
recovery is warranted, and document these
(4) A summary of any other liability actions
on the same contract.

(5) A-E performance evaluation history, The KO may assign a contract specialist to

the negotiation team with the AERC.

EP 715-1-7
31 May 99

reviews. Any errors or deficiencies still held at the clause. Also see 94-2 BCA 26,631, and 94-3 BCA
end of a construction contract which do not 26,992.)
warrant recovery will be presented collectively to
the KO for approval not to pursue, with the m. Negotiation and COD.
concurrence of any other appropriate offices. The
decision not to pursue will be documented in the (1) A reasonable effort will be made to
contract file as required by FAR 36.608. resolve a liability case by negotiation. If negotiation
is not successful, consider using other ADR
k. AERRB Review and KO Action. The techniques4. If a firm does not respond to a
AERRB will promptly review the cases referred to it demand letter in a reasonable length of time, the
by the AERC and recommend action to the KO. firm should be contacted and encouraged to either
The KO will then decide whether to issue a demand take issue with the Government's charges or enter
letter or not pursue recovery. The case document into negotiations.
will be placed in the A-E contract file, along with
the minutes of the AERRB meeting and the KO's (2) If the firm still does not respond, a COD
decision. will be issued without delay. The COD starts a
defined process under the "Disputes" clause. (See
l. Demand Letter. EFARS Appendix A, Part 3, A3-203.) The firm
must either concede the case or appeal to the
(1) The demand letter is an informal appropriate board of contract appeals within 90
Government claim against the A-E firm. It notifies days or the Court of Federal Claims within one year.
the A-E firm of the claim and provides an The COD formally notifies the A-E firm that the
opportunity for resolution of the matter without Government is making a claim for the reasons
resorting to the Disputes clause. The demand stated, gives a detailed statement of damages, and
letter is prepared by the Office of Counsel, with lists the firm's options. The Debt Collection Act of
factual and technical input from the Engineering and 1982 applies to a claim against an A-E firm when a
Construction Divisions and the PM, and shall be COD is issued. See Appendix Y for applicable
signed by the KO. procedures.

(2) The demand letter shall include the (3) Primary responsibility for a case passes
charge of negligence or contract breach, with the from Engineering Division to Office of Counsel if a
supporting documentation, a detailed listing of the COD must be issued. Counsel prepares the COD
damages, and the A-E firm's options. The letter based on data provided by Engineering,
shall state that interest charges will accrue on the Construction and Contracting Divisions. The COD
damages if the claim is not settled within 30 days must be fully coordinated in accordance with
(FAR 32.614-1), and that the damages will be command procedures. Engineering Division remains
adjusted for costs incurred by the Government responsible for monitoring the progress of the case,
subsequent to the demand letter. The letter shall coordinating support, and reporting.
also state that a COD will be issued if satisfactory
progress towards resolution is not made within a (4) The 6-year limitation on initiation of a
specified period of time (typically 30-60 days). Government claim in FAR 33.206(b) is applicable to

(3) Consider when the demand letter should

be issued on a case-by-case basis. For example, if
the A-E liability is obvious and the damages are
ADR is a range of techniques for the
significant, a demand letter should be sent as soon efficient and effective management of disputes
as the AERC prepares the case document instead of without litigation. See FAR 33.214. The
sending a letter of intent. The interest clause in the techniques include collaborative problem solving,
contract (FAR 52.232-17) allows for interest from mediation, facilitation, and third party intervention.
the date of the first written demand by the KO. These techniques are covered in a PROSPECT
(See Hazen & Sawyer, Inc., 85-1 BCA 17,919, course entitled "Executive Seminar in Alternative
which established the right of the Government to Dispute Resolution Procedures." ADR can be very
interest on recoveries under the A-E Responsibility useful in resolution of disputes before issuance of
a COD, as well as afterwards.

EP 715-I-7
31 May 99

A-E liability cases. The g-year period begins on the contract based on an A-E firms design does not
date the A-E firm submits its completed work. affect the Governments right to pursue the
recovery of damages resulting from performance
n. Settlement. A liability case is closed deficiencies which later become apparent (see
when final payment is received from the A-E firm or paragraph 7-7.m(4)).
the KO sends a letter to the firm advising that the
Government is dropping its claim. The A-E contract 7-9. Reporting.
file shall be properly documented (FAR 36.608)
upon settlement of a liability case to show the a. Customer. Customers and partners will
amount received and how the funds were be regularly apprised of the status of A-E liability
dispersed. If the amount of the settlement is less actions on their projects.
than the amount of the assessed damages, the
rationale for accepting the reduced amount must be b. District Reports.
documented. Appendix Y discusses settlement
options and the disposition of the monies received (1) Quarterly. Districts will submit a
in settlements. quarterly report to their MSC (with a copy to
Project Management, Construction, Contracting,
7-8. A-E Performance Evaluation and Contract Counsel and other concerned offices) on the status
Closeout. of all A-E liability cases within 30 days after the end
of each fiscal quarter. The report will be prepared
a. Liability arising during design is reflected on ENG Form 4858A-R, Quarterly A-E Liability Case
on the A-E performance evaluation prepared after Report (Appendix 2). All settlements will be
completion of design. Similarly, liability related to reported, no matter how they were reached. If
construction is reflected on the A-E construction there are no pending A-E liability cases, a letter or
performance evaluation. A revised evaluation will electronic message stating this fact will be
be submitted if a liability case is settled after the submitted in lieu of this report.
final performance evaluation has been prepared.
(2) Annual. USACE operating commands
b. It may be convenient for Engineering will submit an annual report to their MSC on the
Division to combine the review of the construction status of their AERMP by 31 October. The report
A-E performance evaluation with the wrap-up will be prepared on ENG Form 4858-R, Annual A-E
review of the A-E firms design deficiencies after Responsibility Management Program Report
completion of construction. The AE/RE should be (Appendix 2).
c o n t a c t e d t o f i n d o u t w h e t h e r t h e r e are
construction problems attributable to design c. MSC Reports. MSCs will submit an
deficiencies that have not been corrected by annual report to HQUSACE, ATTN: CEMP-EC, by
construction changes. 30 November, consisting of:

c. An A-E contract shall not be closed out (1) A brief cover memorandum summarizing
until the firms performance has been evaluated and the status and effectiveness of their AERMP.
all liability actions have been resolved. However,
closeout of an A-E contract or a construction (2) The annual ENG Form 4858-R for each
subordinate command.


26 Appendices
(See Table of Contents) Major General, USA
Chief of Staff
EP 715-1-7
31 May 99


ACASS Architect-Engineer Contract DFARS Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation

Administration Support System Supplement
ADR alternative dispute resolution DoL Department of Labor
AE area engineer DQMP design quality management plan
A-E architect-engineer DPM Deputy for Programs and Project
AERMP A-E Responsibility Management Management
Program DSB Deputy for Small Business (also
AERA A-E Responsibility Administrator referred to as the Small Business
AERC A-E Responsibility Coordinator Specialist)
AERRB A-E Responsibility Management DUNS Data Universal Numbering System
Review Board (number)
AFARS Army Federal Acquisition Regulation EBCA Engineer Board of Contract Appeals
Supplement ECC estimated construction cost
AR Army Regulation EFARS Engineer Federal Acquisition
ASBCA Armed Services Board of Contract Regulation Supplement
Appeals EM Engineer Manual
ATTN Attention (in a mailing address) ENG Corps of Engineers form
CADD computer-aided design and drafting EP Engineer Pamphlet
CAGE Commercial and Government Entity ER Engineer Regulation
(code) ESB emerging small business
CBD Commerce Business Daily FAO Finance and Accounting Officer
CCASS Construction Contractor Appraisal FAR Federal Acquisition Regulation
Support System FFP firm-fixed-price
CCR Central Contractor Registration FOIA Freedom of Information Act
CEMP-E Engineering and Construction Division, FP fixed-price
Directorate of Military Programs, FS feasibility study
HQUSACE GIS geographic information system
CEMP-EC Construction Policy Branch, CEMP-E GPS global positioning system
CEMP-EE Cost and Systems Engineering Branch, HBCU historically black college and university
CEMP-E HQUSACE Headquarters, United States Army
CEMP-EM Medical Facilities Office, CEMP-E Corps of Engineers
CENWP-CTContracting Division, Portland District HTRW hazardous, toxic, radioactive waste
CEPR-ZA Principal Assistant Responsible for HVAC heating, ventilating and air
Contracting (PARC), HQUSACE conditioning
CERCLA Comprehensive Environmental ID indefinite-delivery (contract) - IDC
Response, Compensation and Liability IGE independent Government estimate
Act KO contracting officer
CFC Court of Federal Claims LH labor-hour (contract or task order)
CFC Chlorofluorocarbons M million
CFR Code of Federal Regulations M-CACES Micro-Computer-Aided Cost Estimating
COD contracting officers decision System
COR contracting officers representative MI minority institution
CPAF cost-plus-award-fee MSC major subordinate command
CPFF cost-plus-fixed-fee N/A not applicable
CR cost-reimbursement NAF Nonappropriated Fund
DA Department of Army NCP National Contingency Plan
DCADS Defense Contract Action Data System NEPA National Environmental Policy Act
DD (DoD) Department of Defense NOx nitrous oxide
DETS Director of Engineering and Technical NTP notice to proceed
Services PA preliminary assessment

EP 715-1-7
31 May 99

PARC Principal Assistant Responsible for SB small business

Contracting SBA Small Business Administration
PCB polychlorinated biphenyl SCA Service Contract Act
PM project manager SDB small disadvantaged business
PNM price negotiation memorandum SF Standard Form
PNO prenegotiation objectives SI site investigation
PROSPECTProponent Sponsored Engineer Corps SIC Standard Industrial Classification
Training SOW statement of work
RCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery SWPPP Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan
Act TERC Total Environmental Restoration
RCS Reports Control Symbol Contract
RD remedial design USACE United States Army Corps of
RE resident engineer Engineers
RI remedial investigation U.S.C. United States Code
RM Resource Management USGS United States Geological Survey
RFPP request for price proposal UST underground storage tank
S&A supervision and administration WD wage determination
SAT simplified acquisition threshold WGM weighted guidelines method

EP 715-l-7
31 May 99


District: Date:


(EP= EP 715-I-7) NO?

1. Is acquisition planning for A-E FAR 7.102

services fully coordinated among all EFARS 7.102, 7.103
pertinent functional elements and EP 2-l .b, 2-2.a, 2-6
reflected in the management plans
for projects?

2. Is there an annual acquisition EFARS 16.504(S-IOO),

strategy for A-E IDCs? 36.601-3-90(b)

3. Are preselection and selection EP 3-3.c(l), 3-6.b

board chairpersons properly
appointed and qualified?

4. Are preselection and selection EP 3-3.d, 3-6.b

board members properly designated
and qualified?

5. Is selection approval authority EFARS 36.602-4(a)

properly delegated? EP 3-3.c(2), 3-l 1 .a

6. Is A-E contract negotiation a EP 4-l .a, 4-4.a(l)

team effort among the KO,
technical personnel, contracting
specialists, and others?

7. Are engineers and architects EP 4-4.b

who are primary participants in A-E
negotiations properly trained?

8. Are streamlining techniques EP Appendix I

being effectively employed?

9. Are there written procedures for EP 6-4.a

preparing, reviewing and approving
A-E performance evaluations?

10. Is there a system for tracking EP 6-4.a

when A-E performance evaluations
are due and when they are

1 1. Are there written procedures EP 7-5.a

implementing the AERMP?

12. Is there an AERC appointed? EP 7-3.b(l)

(Must be in Engineering.)

EP 715-l-7
31 Mav 99


(EP= EP 715-1-7) NO?

13. Is the AERRB established and EP 7-3.b(2), 7-7.k

does it meet as required?

14. Does the AERA periodically EP 7-5.c-d

review the cost effectiveness and
timeliness of A-E liability cases?

15. Are customers regularly EP 7-9.a

apprised of A-E liability actions?

16. Are quarterly and annual EP 7-9.b

AERMP reports prepared and

Other Remarks:

EP 715-l-7
31 May 99





* Requirements in italics are not applicable to individual IDC task orders.


(EP= EP 715-1-7) or N/A?


l-l. Was appropriate acquisition FAR 7.1

planning performed and DFARS 207.1
documented (formal acquisition AFARS 7.1
plan, informal acquisition strategy EFARS 7.1, 36.601-3-
or other suitable form), including 90(b), (e), and (i)
consideration of contract type, EP Chapter 2
options and small business?

l-2. Was a DD Form 2579 DFARS 219.201 (c)(9)(B)

prepared and coordinated with the EFARS 19.201 (c)(9)(B)
KO, DSB and SBA prior to releasing EP 2-5, 3-4.e
the CBD synopsis?

7-3. Does the CBD synopsis FAR 5.207

conform to the standard format? EP 3-4.c-d, Appendix J

1-4. Is the scope of an IDC as EFARS 36.601-3-90(c)

specific as possible?

1-5. Has a proper waiver been EFARS 36.601-3-90(j)-(m,)

obtained for an IDC over $ In/l/year
and/or over 3 years in duration?

1-6. Are the selection criteria clear FAR 36.602-l

and reasonable, in conformance DFARS 236.602-I
with criteria in FAR and DFARS, EP 3-4.d, 3-7, Appendix J
free of unnecessary restrictions,
and in order of importance?

I - 7. Do the preselec tion/selection FAR 36.602-2(a)

reports show that all voting board EFARS 36.602-2(a)
members are highly qualified EP 3-6
professional employees with the
appropriate expertise?

EP 715-1-7
31 May 99


(EP= EP 715-l-7) or N/A?

l-8. Do the preselection/selection FAR 36.602-3(d)

reports clearly explain the primary EP 3-8.e, 3-9.c, 3-10.f
reasons for eliminating the firms
that were not most highly qualified,
and do those reasons properly
relate to the selection criteria?

1-9. Were effective and meaningful FAR 36.602-3(c)

interviews held with the most EP 3-l 0.d
highly qualified firms?

I- 10. Does the selection report FAR 36.602-3(d)

clearly explains the reasons for EP 3- 1 O.e-f
ranking the most highly qualified
firms, and do those reasons
properly relate to the selection

I- 11. Has the selection report FAR 36.602-4

been approved by the designated DFARS 236.602-4
authority? EFARS 36.602-4
EP 3-l 1 .a

I - 12. Were all firms promptly FAR 15.503, 36.607

notified of their selection status? EFARS 36.607
EP 3-l 2

I - 13. Were meaningful debriefings FAR 15.505, 36.607

promptly held with the firms who EFARS 36.607
requested a debriefing? EP 3-l 3


2-l. Does the scope of work EP 4-5

thoroughly address the project
description, scope of A-E services,
schedule, deliverables, reviews,
conferences, criteria and standards,
Government-furnished information,
and administrative instructions?

2-2. If this task order could have FAR 16.500, 16.505(b)

been issued under more than one EFARS 36.601-3-90(h)
IDC, is the contract file documented EP 4-l 4.f(2)
to justify the basis for issuing the
task order under this contract?

2-3. If this task order is over EFARS 36.601-3-90(f)

$500,000, is the use of a task EP 4-l4.f(2)
order instead of initiating a new
contract justified in the file?

EP 715-I-7
31 May 99


(EP= EP 715-1-7) or N/A?

2-4. Is the scope of work for this FAR 16.505(a)(2)

task order within the scope of the EP 4-l 4.f(2)

2-5. Was the Service Contract Act FAR 22.10

considered, and a wage EP 4-9
determination incorpora ted in
contract negotiation, if appropriate?

2-6. Does the PNM indicate that EFARS 36.604(a)

the key contract clauses and EP 4.7.b
performance evaluation process
were discussed with the firm during

2-7. Is/does the IGE: FAR 36.605

- Based on a detailed analysis of EFARS 36.605
required work? EP 4-10, Appendix S
- Include profit based on alternate
structured approach to weighted
guidelines method?
- Include a check on the 6% limit?
- Properly approved prior to
receiving the A-E proposal?

2-8. Is the proposal analysis in FAR 15.404

adequate detail for the size and EP 4-l 2.a, Appendix U
complexity of the action, and does
it address technical, price, and cost

2-9. Are the PNO documented in FAR 15.406-I

adequate detail, and the significant EP 4-l 2.c
differences among the IGE,
proposal and PNO explained?

2- 10. Is there an approved FAR 19.702, 19.704,

subcontracting plan, if applicable? 19.705
EP 4-l 5

2-l 1. Does the PNM: FAR 15.404-4(c)(4)(i)(B),

- Describe the principal elements of 15.406-3
the negotiation? EFARS 36.606-70
- Explain the significant differences EP 4-l 3.c, 4-l 6
between the final agreed price and
the PNO?
- Support that a fair and reasonable
price agreement was reached?
- Show that the final A-E proposal
complies with the 6% limitation?

EP 715-1-7
31 May 99


(EP= EP 715-l-7) or N/A?

2-12. Was the contract or IDC task EP 2-lO.b-c

order awarded within the pertinent
time standard, exclusive of
iustifiable delays?


3- 1. Is there a COR with AFARS 1.602-2-90

appropriate training appointed in EP 5-4
the contract?

3-2. Is there evidence that the EP 5-3, 5-5, 5-9

Government closely monitored and
managed the A-E firms
performance and reviewed the A-E
products for technical adequacy?

3-3. Is there evidence of FAR 36.608, 36.609-2

enforcement of the A-E firms EP Chapter 7
responsibility and liability for design
errors and deficiencies?

3-4. Is there evidence of FAR 36.609-1, 52.236-22

enforcement of the firms EP 7-4.b
responsibility for design within the
construction funding limitation?

3-5. Were progress payments FAR 52.232-l 0

processed promptly and retainage EP 5-7
withheld as appropriate?

3-6. Was there an appraisal of the FAR 36.604

A-E performance prepared after DFARS 236.604
each submission or phase of work, EFARS 36.604
and the final performance EP Chapter 6
evaluation prepared and sent to
ACASS and the firm?

3- 7. Were subcontracting reports FAR 52.219-g

(SF 294/2951 submitted by the EP 5-8
contractor, if applicable?

Other Remarks:

EP 715-1-7
31 May 99































EP 715-1-7
31 May 99


INTRODUCTION the work is of the type typically performed by

architects or engineers in association with the
T his appendix provides guidance and design or construction of real property, even if
examples to assist the contracting officer when there is no explicit registration requirement in the
determining whether a particular contract should be SOW. Real property is land and any structures on
procured as A-E services in accordance with the it. Design also includes investigations and planning
procedures FAR Subpart 36.6. when related to a particular construction project.
Construction is defined in FAR 36.102 as
A contract must be procured in accordance construction, alteration or repair of buildings,
with FAR 36.6 when: structures, or other real property. Many specific
examples are cited. "Construction does not include
1. The SOW includes work that is A-E ... vessels, aircraft, or other kinds of personal
services, and property." Personal property are items that are
movable or not attached to the land.
2. The A-E services are a substantial or
dominant portion of the contract. "(3) Other professional services of an
architectural or engineering nature or incidental
Each of these two conditions are discussed in turn services thereto (including studies, investigations,
below. surveying and mapping, tests, evaluations,
consultations, comprehensive planning, program
CATEGORIES OF A-E SERVICES management, conceptual designs, plans and
specifications, value engineering, construction
FAR 36.601-4(a) describes four categories of phase services, soils engineering, drawing reviews,
A-E services, each of which is discussed below. preparation of operating and maintenance manuals
and other related services) that logically or
"(1) Professional services of an architectural justifiably require performance by registered
or engineering nature, as defined by applicable architects or engineers or their employees."
State law, which the State law requires to be
performed or approved by a registered architect or Discussion: The test for this category is whether
engineer." the work is of the type that should logically or
justifiably be accomplished by, or under the
Discussion: The test for this category is whether supervision, of architects or engineers. However,
the work is typically of the type that state laws the work must be of an architectural or engineering
require to be performed or approved by a registered nature. For example, not all studies, investigations,
architect or engineer (even though the work is likely tests, evaluations, consultations, planning, and
on Federal property and state laws generally do not construction phase services are architectural or
apply to the project). All states license architects engineering in nature. Also, the list of typical
and engineers for the protection of public health, services in parentheses is not all inclusive;
safety and welfare. State laws vary but generally reasonable extrapolations from this list can be
the practices of engineering and architecture include made.
the evaluation, planning, design and construction
supervision of public and private buildings and "(4) Professional surveying and mapping
structures and the equipment and utilities thereof, services of an architectural or engineering nature.
site development, and transportation systems. Surveying is considered to be an architectural and
engineering service and shall be procured pursuant
"(2) Professional services of an architectural to Section 36.601 from registered surveyors or
or engineering nature associated with design or architects and engineers. Mapping associated with
construction of real property." the research, planning, development, design,
construction, or alteration of real property is
Discussion: The test for this category is whether considered to be an architectural and engineering

EP 715-1-7
31 May 99

service and is to be procured pursuant to Section bearing partitions to accommodate a new

36.601..." occupancy, alteration of hallways and corridors to
comply with life safety codes, and va rious
Discussion: The general FAR test for this category improvements to allow handicapped access), which
is whether the surveying and mapping is related to may also include interior design services (such as
architectural and engineering activities. But also, space planning and modular furniture systems
by separate statute (33 U.S.C. 569b), all surveying design), is A-E services. However, a contract
and mapping procured by USACE must use Brooks principally for interior design services, where load-
Act procedures. EFARS 36.601-4(a)(4)(A) provides bearing structural elements and mechanical and
examples of surveying and mapping services which electrical systems are not altered, is not A-E
should be procured as A-E services. In USACE, the services, notwithstanding the fact that a few states
performance of surveying and mapping services will require registration of interior designers.
not be limited to A-E firms, but may include
surveying and mapping professionals such as 3. A contract for the design of the foundations
licensed surveyors, geodesists, and cartographers. for a high-rise building is A-E services, even if the
necessary soils borings and tests are the majority of
MIXED WORK the effort measured in hours or dollars. However,
a contract principally for borings and laboratory
FAR 36.601-3(c) provides the following tests, where engineering analysis and judgment are
guidance when the SOW includes both A-E services not required, is not A-E services, even if the SOW
and other services: requires monitoring of the borings and tests by a
registered engineer as a quality control measure.
"When the contract statement of work
includes both architect-engineer services and other 4. A contract for landscape architecture, which
services, the contracting officer shall follow the is concerned with the functional as well as
procedures in this subpart if the statement of work, aesthetic aspects of site development and is
substantially or to a dominant extent, specifies licensed by most states, is A-E services. However,
performance or approval by a registered or licensed a contract which principally requires application of
architect or engineer." the natural sciences (such as botany, marine
science, or forestry) is not A-E services.
Discussion: When a contract includes a mixture of
A-E services and other services, the contract shall 5. A contract for hydraulic engineering to study
be procured in accordance with FAR 36.6 if the A-E the effects on shoreline erosion and marine
services are a substantial or dominant part of the structures due to increased flow in a river is A-E
work. Substantial means a considerable percentage services. However, a contract principally to study
of the work but not necessarily a majority of the the effects on marine plants and fish due to
hours or cost. Dominant means the primary increased flow in a river is not A-E services, even if
purpose of the work, although not necessarily a a minor effort is required by a hydraulic engineer.
majority of the hours or cost, or the largest
component of the work. 6. A contract for an environmental study or
assessment with significant engineering
EXAMPLES considerations (such as alternative highway
alignments, air pollution control, sanitary sewage
1. A contract for the complete architectural and waste collection and treatment, storm drainage
engineering design of a building, structure or utility management, domestic water supply, energy
system is A-E services. However, a contract consumption, or remedial technology evaluation) is
principally for drafting services or the development A-E services. However, a contract for
or revision of record drawings is not A-E services, environmental studies or assessment where the
even if the SOW requires approval by a registered engineering considerations are not significant or
architect or engineer as a quality control measure.dominant is not A-E services. See Appendix C for
more detailed guidance on which types of
2. A contract for the architectural design of the environmental services should typically be procured
renovation of a building (such as relocation of load as A-E services.

EP 715-1-7
31 May 99

7. A contract for aerial photogrammetry is A-E accommodate a new mission is an A-E service.
services in USACE. However, a contract for aerial However, a contract to do a cost/benefit study of
photography only which does not result in a which installation should receive this new mission
surveying and mapping product is not A-E services. is not A-E services, even though facilities analysis
See EM 1110-1-1000 for additional guidance. would be a part of such a study.

8. A contract for construction phase services, 11. A contract to design a building, including an
such as shop drawing review, evaluation of artist's rendering and a three dimensional model, is
construction methods, and interpretation of plans A-E services. However, a contract only for a
and specifications, is A-E services. However, a rendering and/or model is not A-E services.
contract for construction phase services that is
principally for materials testing, quantity verification 12. An engineering geology study to determine the
or materials scheduling is not A-E services. foundation requirements for a new dam is A-E
services. However, a geology investigation that is
9. A contract for the architectural renovation of not directly related to a construction project, such
the exterior of a historic building (including as mapping of seismic faults, is not A-E services,
cleaning and repair of masonry, repair and/or notwithstanding the fact that many states license
replacement of doors and windows, and geologists.
handicapped accessibility improvements), which
may require research by a architectural historian, is 13. Comprehensive planning that is related to
A-E services. However, a contract principally for future construction requirements on a military
historic research, archaeology, or cultural resources installation is A-E services. However,
studies is not A-E services, even though a minor comprehensive planning that is not related to
effort may be required by an architect. construction, such as information systems
improvements or natural resources management, is
10. A contract to study whether to renovate an not A-E services.
existing building or construct a new building to

EP 715-1-7
31 May 99


INTRODUCTION Countermeasures Plans under the National

Contingency Plan (NCP).
USACE procures a significant amount of
environmental services, some of which are A-E 5. Design of corrective actions in accordance
services. This appendix provides examples of with the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
common environmental projects which are typically (RCRA).
A-E services, which are not typically A-E services,
and which may be A-E services. This guidance, in 6. Design of munitions and ordinance closures in
conjunction with Appendix B, should be used when accordance with RCRA.
determining whether a particular contract for
environmental services should be procured as an 7. Preservation surveys, management plans, and
A-E contract. restoration designs for historic structures.

If a contract for environmental services is 8. Development of Storm Water Pollution

procured as A-E services, the Standard Industrial Prevention Plans (SWPPP) which include the design
Classification (SIC) code (FAR 19.102) must be of appropriate diversion structures.
8711 (Engineering Services), 8712 (Architectural
Services) or 8713 (Surveying Services). If a 9. Design of repair, removal and/or replacement
contract is procured as services other than A-E, SIC of underground storage tanks (UST) and design of
codes 8711, 8712 and 8713 will not be used. leak detection systems for UST.
Instead use 8734 (Testing Laboratories), 8742
(Management Consulting Services), 8744 10. Design of boiler replacement or upgrade
(Environmental Remediation Services), or other projects, such as installation of low NOx systems.
appropriate SIC code.
11. Design of a new or upgraded RCRA Part B
PROJECTS WHICH ARE TYPICALLY A-E SERVICES permitted hazardous waste management unit.

1. Air quality corrective action plans and 12. Closure procedures, documentation and
projects, such as for: certification for RCRA Part B permitted hazardous
a. Stationary and mobile sources waste management unit.
b. Asbestos
c. Radon 13. Design of a new or upgraded solid waste land
d. Chlorofluorocarbons (CFC) and halon based unit.

2. Water resources corrective action plans and 14. Design of support systems under the
projects, such as for: excavation standards of the Occupational Safety
a. Drinking water and Health Act for excavations greater than 20
b. Wastewater feet.
c. Point source and non-point source
discharge 15. Monitoring and certification of closure of
d. Storm water discharge injection wells in accordance with 40 CFR 144.

3. Comprehensive Environmental Response, PROJECTS WHICH ARE NOT TYPICALLY A-E

Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) studies SERVICES
and design (preliminary assessment/site
investigation (PA/SI), remedial investigation/ 1. Environmental Compliance Assessment
feasibility study (RI/FS), treatability studies, and System surveys.
remedial design (RD)) performed as a single project.
2. Preparation of RCS-1383 reports.
4. Preparation of Spill Prevention, Control, and

EP 715-1-7
31 May 99

3. Air quality management plans, surveys and/or 13. Lead based paint surveys.
emissions reporting, such as for:
a. Stationary and mobile sources 14. General environmental program management
b. Asbestos functions.
c. Radon
d. CFC and halon 15. Forestry management plans.

4. Water resources management plans and/or 16. Wildlife surveys and management plans,
laboratory testing, such as for: including endangered species.
a. Drinking water
b. Wastewater 17. Archaeology surveys and management plans.
c. Point source and non-point source
discharge 18. Pest management plans.
d. Storm water discharge
19. Wetland identification surveys and
5. Data management for the Army Automated management plans.
Environmental Management Information System.
20. Coastal zone management plans.
6. Pollution prevention opportunity assessments.
21. Land management and restoration plans.
7. Hazardous materials management plans in
accordance with: 22. Solid waste management functions.
a. Toxic Substances Control Act
b. Applicable Department of Transportation 23. Wastewater management functions.
regulations, including:
(1) Polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB) PROJECTS WHICH MAY OR MAY NOT BE A-E
management and reporting SERVI C ES, DEPENDING O N SPECIFIC

8. Planning, release reporting and response 1. National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
actions under the NCP, such as for: documentation, including environmental
a. Oil assessments and environmental impact statements.
b. Hazardous substances
c. Installation Spill Contingency Plan 2. Noise abatement activities, such as:
d. Toxic release inventory a. Compliance with the Quiet Communities
9. Testing and management plans required by b. Compliance with the Noise Control Act,
RCRA, including: including:
a. Hazardous materials and hazardous waste (1) Assessment of impact by activities
management plans (2) Installation compatible use zone studies
b. Solid waste management plans
c. Recycling plans 3. Preparation of air quality permits, such as for:
d. UST management plans and testing a. Stationary and mobile sources
b. Asbestos
10. Hazardous and toxic waste and materials c. Radon
management, including compliance with the d. CFC and halon
Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know
Act. 4. Preparation of permits for water resources,
such as for:
11. Chemical inventories. a. Drinking water
b. Wastewater
12. Chemical testing. c. Point source and non-point source

EP 715-1-7
31 May 99

d. Storm water discharge 7. CERCLA PA/SI and RI only without FS and

5. Data collection and reporting under Title V of
the Clean Air Act. 8. Preparation of SWPPP.

6. UST installation certification.













31 May 99
EP 715-1-7
EP 715-1-7
31 May 99



ACQUISITION PLANNING PHASE CBD Synopsis Period. Minimum 30 days response

period as required by FAR 5.203(c), for contracts
Authorization. Receipt of a formal authorization or expected to exceed the SAT.
customer request to initiate a project or A-E
contract. Assignment of the project or contract to Detailed Scope of Work. Development of a detailed
team members in project management, engineering, SOW, including a description of the facility or
contracting and other appropriate functional areas. project, design criteria, specific contract services
and products, performance schedule, quality control
Review of Requirements. Review of the project or requirements, and administrative instructions.
contract requirements. Coordination with the
customer to understand and refine the Preselection. A preselection board is optional. If a
requirements, and obtain other pertinent preselection board is not held, its functions will be
information. performed by the selection board. Gathering and
organizing documents for evaluation by preselection
Preliminary Scope of Work (SOW). Preparation of and selection boards, including SFs 254 and 255
the preliminary SOW based on review of the and performance evaluations. Conducting the
requirements and coordination with technical preselection board and preparation of the board
personnel and the customer. report. Scheduling board meetings, appointing
board members, and preparing board score sheets
Acquisition Strategy. Decision on performance by or worksheets for both the preselection and
the traditional design-bid-build method or an selection boards should be done during the
alternative method such as design-build (not synopsis period.
procured as A-E services). Decision on which
portion of work, if any, will be done by in-house Selection. Conducting a selection board and
personnel. Decision on packaging in one or multiple preparation of the board report.
A-E contracts. Decision on appropriate A-E
contract type. Development of a preliminary project Selection Approval. Review and approval of the
budget (including preliminary estimate of A-E fee), selection report in accordance with the delegated
schedule, and informal or formal acquisition plan, selection authority in EFARS 36.602-4.
and their coordination with the customer and/or
higher authority. Verification of the availability of PROPOSAL PHASE
funding with the customer.
Request for Price Proposal (RFPP). Formal
Small Business Coordination. (Not applicable for notification of selection (not applicable to task
task orders.) Coordination with the DSB and the orders) and RFPP sent to the most highly qualified
SBA to identify prime contract and subcontracting firm. The RFPP includes the draft contract (not
opportunities for SB and SDB firms. Decision on applicable to task orders), SOW, project
set-aside for SB, ESB or 8(a) A-E firms. Preparation documentation and design criteria.
of DD Form 2579, Small Business Coordination
Record. Scope of Work Review by A-E. Review of the
SOW, project documentation and design criteria by
SELECTION PHAS E (Not applicable for task the A-E firm to prepare for the preproposal
orders.) conference, if needed, and the development of its
Preparation of CBD Synopsis. Preparation of the
synopsis based on the preliminary SOW, and review Preproposal Conference. Conference(s) among the
and approval, as required. Electronic transmission A-E firm, USACE personnel, customer and others as
of the synopsis to the CBD and preparation for appropriate to discuss and refine project and
publication by the CBD. contract requirements. Conference(s) may be by

EP 715-1-7
31 May 99

telephone, at the project site, in the firm's office or 15.404-1(b). Based on the technical, cost and
elsewhere, as appropriate. price analyses, development of the PNO in
accordance with FAR 15.406-1. Coordination with
Revised Scope Of Work. Resolution of any issues customer and/or higher authority on estimated
raised at the preproposal conference(s) and revision funding requirements.
of the SOW accordingly.
PNO Review and Approval. Review and approval of
Detailed Government Estimate. Preparation and the proposal analysis and PNO, in accordance with
approval of an IGE based on a detailed analysis of local procedures.
the SOW as required by FAR 36.605. Coordination
with the customer and/or higher authority on Negotiation. Negotiation of a fair and reasonable
estimated funding requirements. price in accordance with the PNO. Includes
negotiation of an acceptable small business
A-E Price Proposal. Preparation and submission of subcontracting plan (if applicable) and approval by
a price proposal by the A-E firm. Includes the KO prior to contract award.
preparation of a small business subcontracting plan
if the A-E firm is a large business and the proposal CONTRACT AWARD PHASE
exceeds $500,000 (not applicable for task orders).
Negotiation Documentation. Preparation of a PNM
Fact-Finding. Obtaining information in order to in accordance with FAR 15.406-3, preparation of
understand the A-E price proposal and its the final SOW as a result of clarifications and
assumptions, and to clarify any ambiguities, changes during negotiations, and receipt of the final
omissions or uncertainties in the RFPP and SOW A-E proposal.
prior to negotiations (FAR 15.406-1(a)). After fact-
finding, a revised proposal may be requested. Funding Certification. Requesting, receiving and
certifying the funds to award the contract or issue
NEGOTIATION PHASE the task order.

Technical Analysis. Evaluation of the judgmental Price Negotiation Memorandum (PNM) Review and
elements of the A-E proposal in accordance with Approval. Review and approval of the PNM in
FAR 15.404-1(e). accordance with local procedures.

Audit. If considered necessary by the KO (FAR Contract Preparation. Preparation of SF 252,

15.404-2(a)). Architect-Engineer Contract, or preparation of DD
Form 1155, Order for Supplies or Services, for a
Cost/Price Analyses and Prenegotiation Objectives task order.
(PNO). Evaluation of all cost elements of the A-E
proposal in accordance with FAR 15.404-1(c), Contract Review and Award. Final review of the
using the results of the technical analysis and the contract documentation and signing of the contract
audit, if performed. Evaluation of the total price of by the KO and the A-E firm, or signing of the task
the proposal and, as appropriate, the prices of order by the KO.
phases or items of work in accordance with FAR

EP 715-I-7
31 May 99


Duration (Calendar Days)

Contracting Activity Contract Task Order
CBD Synopsis Period 30 N/A
Preselection 10 N/A
Selection 10 N/A
Selection Approval 3 N/A
SOW Review by A-E 7 2
Preproposal Conference 2 1
Revised SOW 10 4
Government Estimate (9) (7)
A-E Price Proposal 14 7
Proposal Analysis/PNO 10 4
Negotiation 14 7

Contract/Order Preparation 7 3
Contract/Order Review and Award 14 3

1. See Appendix A for acronyms.
2. Durations in parentheses ( ) are not on the critical path of the contracting
3. N/A = not applicable for task orders.
4. Asterisk (*) indicates activities applicable for preparation and issue of task
orders scoped and negotiated by outside customers, such as Army installations.
Total duration = 6 days.

EP 715-1-7
31 May 99


FAR 5.207(b)(4) specifies a standard 17-item similar scopes of work such that a particular task
format for CBD synopses. Most items are self- order might be awarded under more than one ID
explanatory. Additional instructions are provided contract. See EFARS 36.601-3-90 for guidance.
below for Items 6, 8, and 17 to standardize
synopses for A-E services throughout USACE. - Anticipated start and completion dates of
the contract.
- Proposed contract options, such as final
All A-E services, except for surveying and design, construction phase services, or option
mapping, will be listed under Service Code C. periods for an ID contract.
Surveying and mapping contracts will be listed
under Service Code T, except those exclusively for - Maximum contract and task order amounts
boundary surveys which will be listed under Service for an ID contract.
Code R.
- Range of estimated A-E contract price, if
8.SUBJECT construction costs are not applicable. Use the
ranges in FAR 36.204 and DFARS 236.204.
Title of proposed A-E contract in capital letters
such as "DESIGN OF GENERAL PURPOSE - Subcontracting plan requirements and goals
WAREHOUSE, FT. RUCKER, AL" or "INDEFINITE for large businesses if the contract price is
DELIVERY CONTRACT FOR GEOTECHNICAL estimated to exceed $500,000.
DISTRICT." - Applicability of the Service Contract Act
(FAR 22.10).
ITEM 17.
- Requirement for registration in Central
The description will be divided into the Contractor Registration.
following four standard parts:
INFORMATION Include as appropriate:
- Description of the project and/or A-E
- General nature of A-E services, such as services. Do not include selection criteria in this
design, studies, surveying and mapping, facilities description.
master planning, or construction phase services.
Do not use the terms "Title I" or "Title II", which - Description of deliverables. Refer to the
are obsolete and have no statutory or regulatory most recent guidance from the Tri-Service
basis. CADD/GIS Technology Center on sample CBD
language for CADD and GIS deliverables. (See
- Set-aside restrictions. Appendix D for the Internet address of the Tri-
Service Center. The referenced guidance on A-E
- Type of contract, such as FFP, ID, or CPAF. deliverables is under Products.)

- Number of contracts. If multiple contracts, - Area of work for an ID contract.

state how rank of firms will relate to award of
contracts. - Range of estimated construction cost, if
applicable. Use the ranges in FAR 36.204 and
- If multiple ID contracts, state method to be DFARS 236.204.
used to allocate task orders among contracts when
two or more ID contracts contain the same or

EP 715-1-7
31 May 99

CRITERIA List all selection - Design quality management approach.
criteria in relative order of importance following the
general FAR and DFARS selection criteria. - Specialized equipment requirements.
Reference to CBD Numbered Note 24 is not
sufficient. State any justifiable minimum - Knowledge of a foreign language.
qualifications (such as minimum number of years
experience, minimum number of projects, or b. Professional Qualifications:
minimum number of personnel in a discipline).
- Professional and supporting disciplines,
Begin this part with a statement similar to the including registration or licensing requirements.
- Specific experience and training for certain
"See Note 24 for a general description of the personnel.
A-E selection process. The selection criteria for this
particular project are listed below in descending c. Past Performance: State this criterion
order of importance (first by major criterion and similar to the following:
then by each sub-criterion). Criteria a-f are primary.
Criteria g-i are secondary and will only be used as "Past performance on DoD and other
"tie-breakers" among technically equal firms." contracts with respect to cost control, quality of
work, and compliance with performance
Typical selection criteria include1: schedules."

a. Specialized Experience and Technical d. Capacity to Accomplish the Work:

- Ability to meet the schedule of the overall
- Experience of firm and its consultants in project and/or certain phases.
certain types of projects and/or features of work.
- Ability to provide a minimum number of
- Experience in energy conservation, pollution teams or crews for surveying, inspections, data
prevention, waste reduction, and the use of collection or similar services.
recovered materials, as appropriate.
- Ability to accomplish a certain number of
- Experience of the prime firm and significant task orders simultaneously for an ID contract.
subcontractors in working together.
- Minimum number of personnel in a certain
- Experience in adapting standard design discipline to be assigned to the project, when
packages. appropriate.

- Specific technical capabilities, such as - If schedule is critical for the project, say so.
construction cost estimating or materials testing.
e. Knowledge of the Locality: Specific
- Knowledge of specific laws and regulations. knowledge of certain local conditions or project site
features, such as geological features, climatic
- Compatibility with specific CADD conditions, local construction methods, or local
equipment, and format of required CADD products. laws and regulations. A general desire for a local
firm must be translated into specific required
- Knowledge of certain design criteria. knowledge of the locality.

f. SB and SDB Participation: Include this as

a secondary criterion in all unrestricted synopses.
The criteria are listed in the order of
State similar to the following:
importance which is usually most appropriate,
however they may be ordered differently as
warranted for specific contracts.

EP 715-1-7
31 May 99

"Extent of participation of small businesses "See Note 24 for general submission

(including women-owned), small disadvantaged requirements. Interested firms having the
businesses, historically black colleges and capabilities to perform this work must submit ___
universities, and minority institutions in the copies of SF 255 (11/92 edition) and ___ copies of
proposed contract team, measured as a percentage SF 254 (11/92 edition) for the prime firm and all
of the total estimated effort." consultants to the above address not later than the
close of business on the 30th day after the date of
g. Geographic Proximity: Proximity should this announcement. If the 30th day is a Saturday,
normally only be used as a selection criterion for Sunday, or Federal holiday, the deadline is the close
small or routine projects and ID contracts in support of business of the next business day. Solicitation
of a specific installation(s). If used, this criterion packages are not provided. This is not a request
should be secondary and stated similar to the for proposal."
Indicate any additional submittal requirements
"Location of the firm in the general or instructions such as:
geographical area of ______."
- Specific instructions for completing certain
h. Equitable Distribution of DoD Contracts: blocks of the SF 254 or SF 255.
This is a secondary criterion to be included in all
synopses. State similar to the following: - Information to include in SF 255, block 10,
such as design quality management plan (DQMP),
"Volume of DoD contract awards in the last organization chart, or description of capabilities and
12 months as described in Note 24." equipment.

REQUIREMENTS Do not - Requirement for in-person presentations by
include any selection criteria in this part. Begin this the most highly qualified firms for significant
part with a statement similar to the following: projects.

EP 715-1-7
31 May 99


See Appendix J for complete instructions on water, sewer, natural gas, HVAC, electric service,
preparing CBD synopses, including instructions for security lighting, parking, storm drainage,
more complex projects. information systems, and general site
______________________________________________ improvements. Twelve buildings of approximately
C Architect and Engineering Services - Construction 119,000 SF containing asbestos will be demolished
______________________________________________ as a part of this project. The estimated
US Army Corps of Engineers, Ft. Worth construction cost of this project is between
District, P.O. Box 17300, ATTN: CESWF-ED- $10,000,000 and $25,000,000. Cost estimates
MS, Room 705, 819 Taylor Street, Ft. Worth, must be prepared using the Corps of Engineers
TX 76102-0300 Micro Computer Aided Cost Estimating System
C - DESIGN OF CONSOLIDATED TACTICAL (MCACES). MCACES software and training will be
EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE SHOP, FORT BLISS, provided by the Corps. The contractor shall be
T X,
X POC John Smith, (817)334-1234. 1 . responsible for accomplishing designs and preparing
CONTRACT INFORMATION: A-E services are drawings using computer-aided design and drafting
required for site investigation, planning, engineering (CADD) and delivering the three-dimensional
studies, concept design, final design (option), and drawings in Bentley MicroStation 95 CADD
construction phase services (option) for the subject software, Windows NT version, electronic digital
project. This announcement is open to all format. The Government will only accept the final
businesses regardless of size. A firm-fixed-price product for full operation, without conversion or
contract will be negotiated. The contract is reformatting, in the target CADD software format,
anticipated to be awarded in Mar 97 and design and on the target platform specified herein. The
completed by Nov 98. If a large business is selected target platform is an Intergraph TD220-200
for this contract, it must comply with FAR 52.219- personal computer, with a Windows NT operating
9 regarding the requirement for a subcontracting system. 3. SELECTION CRITERIA: See Note 24 for
plan on that part of the work it intends to a general description of the A-E selection process.
subcontract. The subcontracting goals for the Fort The selection criteria for this particular project are
Worth District which will be considered in the listed below in descending order of importance (first
negotiation of this contract are: (1) at least 61.2% by major criterion and then by each sub-criterion).
of a contractor's intended subcontract amount be Criteria a-e are primary. Criteria f-h are secondary
placed with small businesses (SB), including small and will only be used as "tie-breakers" among
disadvantaged businesses (SDB) and women-owned technically equal firms. a. Specialized experience
small businesses (WOSB); (2) at least 9.1% of a and technical competence in: (1) Design of heavy
contractor's intended subcontract amount be placed equipment maintenance facilities. (2) Fire protection
with SDB; and, (3) at least 4.5% of a contractor's design for heavy equipment shops. (3) Producing
intended subcontract amount be placed with quality designs based on evaluation of a firm's
WOSB. The plan is not required with this submittal. design quality management plan (DQMP). The
To be eligible for contract award, a firm must be evaluation will consider the management approach,
registered in the DoD Central Contractor coordination of disciplines and subcontractors,
Registration (CCR). Register via the CCR Internet quality control procedures, and prior experience of
site at http://ccr.edi.disa.mil or by contacting the the prime firm and any significant subcontractors
DoD Electronic Commerce Information Center at 1- on similar projects. (4) Energy conservation and use
800-334-3414. 2 . PROJECT INFORMATION: of recovered materials. (5) Producing CADD
125,000 SF maintenance facility for heavy armored drawings in a format fully compatible with
vehicles adapted from a standard Army design. Microstation 95. (6) Surveying, testing, and
Facility includes traveling bridge cranes, vehicle and quantifying friable asbestos in buildings, and
industrial exhaust systems, fuel dispensing, battery preparation of plans and specifications for removal
charging, arms room with intrusion detection and disposal of asbestos. (7) Construction cost
system (power conduit rough-in only), fire estimating and preparation of estimates using
protection systems, oil-water separators, and waste MCACES or similar automated software. b.
oil disposal system. Supporting facilities include Qualified professional personnel in the following key

EP 715-1-7
31 May 99

disciplines: project management (architect or

engineer), architecture, fire protection engineering,
mechanical engineering, electrical engineering,
structural engineering, civil engineering. The lead
architect or engineer in each discipline must be
registered to practice in the appropriate professional
field. The evaluation will consider education,
certifications, training, registration, overall and
relevant experience, and longevity with the firm. c.
Past performance on DoD and other contracts with
respect to cost control, quality of work, and
compliance with performance schedules, as
determined from ACASS and other sources. d.
Capacity to submit the concept design (35%
complete) by Aug 97 and complete the final design
by Nov 98. The evaluation will consider the
experience of the firm and any consultants in similar
size projects, and the availability of an adequate
number of personnel in key disciplines. e.
Knowledge of design of building envelopes and
systems in hot, arid climate similar to Ft. Bliss. f.
Extent of participation of SB (including WOSB),
SDB, historically black colleges and universities, and
minority institutions in the proposed contract team,
measured as a percentage of the total estimated
effort. g. Volume of DoD contract awards in the
last 12 months as described in Note 24. h.
Proximity to Ft. Bliss, TX. 4 . SU B MISSION
REQUIREMENTS: See Note 24 for general
submission requirements. Interested firms having
the capabilities to perform this work must submit
two copies of SF 255 (11/92 edition), and two
copies of SF 254 (11/92 edition) for the prime firm
and all consultants, to the above address not later
than the close of business on the 30th day after the
date of this announcement. If the 30th day is a
Saturday, Sunday, or Federal holiday, the deadline
is the close of business of the next business day.
Include the firm's ACASS number in SF 255, Block
3b. For ACASS information, call 503-808-4590. In
SF 255, Block 10 describe the firm's overall DQMP.
A project-specific design quality control plan must
be prepared and approved by the Government as a
condition of contract award, but is not required
with this submission. In Block 10 also indicate the
estimated percentage involvement of each firm on
the proposed team. Solicitation packages are not
provided. This is not a request for proposal.

EP 715-1-7
31 May 99


See Appendix J for complete instructions on businesses (SB), including small disadvantaged
preparing CBD synopses, including instructions for businesses (SDB) and women-owned small
more complex projects. businesses (WOSB); (2) at least 8% of a
___________________________________________ contractor's intended subcontract amount be placed
T Photographic, Mapping, Printing, and Publication with SDB; and, (3) at least 3.5% of a contractor's
Services intended subcontract amount be placed with
___________________________________________ WOSB. The wages and benefits of service
US Army Corps of Engineers, St. Louis employees (see FAR 22.10) performing under these
District, 1222 Spruce Street, St. Louis, MO contracts must be at least equal to those
63103-2833 determined by the Department of Labor under the
T - HYDROGRAPHIC SURVEYING, Service Contract Act, as determined relative to the
PHOTOGRAMMETRIC MAPPING, AND BOUNDARY employee's office location (not the location of the
SURVEYING SERVICES FOR ST. LOUIS DISTRICT, DISTRICT work). To be eligible for contract award, a firm
POC Dennis Morgan, (314) 331-8373. 1 . must be registered in the DoD Central Contractor
CONTRACT INFO RMATION: Hydrographic, Registration (CCR). Register via the CCR Internet
photogrammetric, and related boundary surveying site at http://ccr.edi.disa.mil or by contacting the
services, procured in accordance with PL 92-582 DoD Electronic Commerce Information Center at 1-
(Brooks A-E Act) and FAR Part 36, are required to 800-334-3414. 2. PROJECT INFORMATION:
support engineering, design operations, Hydrographic surveying is required to support river
maintenance, and construction of various navigation and harbor navigation, reservoir sedimentation
or flood control projects within or assigned to the studies, beach and shoreline erosion studies,
St. Louis District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. underwater hazard detection, dredging and
Two indefinite delivery contracts will be negotiated construction measurement, and river/tidal hydraulic
and awarded, each with a base period not to studies. Photogrammetric mapping requirements
exceed one year and two option periods not to supporting the above projects will consist of aerial
exceed one year each. The amount of work in each photography, analytical aerotriangulation, stereo
contract period will not exceed approximately mapping compilation, orthophotography, and land
$1,000,000. An option period may be exercised use/land cover interpretation. Real property surveys
when the contract amount for the base period or of Government-owned land tracts, such as levees,
preceding option period has been exhausted or reservoirs, or dredge disposal areas, may be
nearly exhausted. Work will be issued by negotiated required to establish or reestablish corners,
firm-fixed-price or labor-hour task orders not to monuments, and boundary lines, or for the purpose
exceed the base contract amount. The contracting of describing, locating fixed improvements, or
officer will consider the following factors in platting or dividing parcels. Work will be submitted
deciding which contractor will be selected to in hard copy report format, hard copy F-size
negotiate an order: performance and quality of drawings, and/or automated/CADD format. Work
deliverables under the current contract, current may be performed to support other Federal
capacity to accomplish the order in the required agencies. 3. SELECTION CRITERIA: See Note 24
time, uniquely specialized experience, and equitable for a general description of the A-E selection
distribution of work among the contractors. The process. The selection criteria for this particular
contracts are anticipated to be awarded in March project are listed below in descending order of
1999. This announcement is open to all businesses importance (first by major criterion and then by
regardless of size. If a large business is selected for each sub-criterion). Criteria a-e are primary. Criteria
this contract, it must comply with FAR 52.219-9 f-g are secondary and will only be used as "tie-
regarding the requirement for a subcontracting plan breakers" among technically equal firms. a.
on that part of the work it intends to subcontract. Specialized experience and technical competence:
The subcontracting goals for the St. Louis District (1) Hydrographic surveying and mapping expertise
which will be considered in the negotiation of this in the areas of river and harbor navigation,
contract are: (1) at least 60% of a contractor's reservoir, beach, and shoreline surveys/studies,
intended subcontract amount be placed with small underwater hazard detection, construction and

EP 715-1-7
31 May 99

dredging measurement and payment, and river/tidal Photogrammetrist), overall and relevant experience,
hydraulic studies, using differential GPS, acoustic, and longevity with the firm. c. Past performance on
and conventional survey techniques. (2) Own or DoD and other contracts with respect to cost
lease an automated hydrographic survey vessel of control, quality of work, and compliance with
19-30 foot length capable of being trailered to and performance schedules, as determined from ACASS
operating in U.S. inland and coastal waters, and other sources. d. Capacity to perform
equipped with an automated single-beam 200 KHz approximately $1,000,000 in work of the required
acoustic depth measurement system, full motion type in a one-year period. The evaluation will
compensation, side scan sonar imaging for consider the availability of an adequate number of
underwater object detection, and multi-beam personnel in key disciplines and equipment
acoustic imagery from a single transducer source. availability. e. Knowledge of boundary and
(3) experience in photogrammetric production. (4) coordinate systems in states within the boundaries
photogrammetric equipment including owning or of the St. Louis District (IL and MO). f. Extent of
leasing airworthy aircraft, currently certified participation of SB (including WOSB), SDB,
precision aerial mapping camera, photographic lab historically black colleges and universities, and
for reproducing aerial photographic and mapping minority institutions in the proposed contract team,
products, hardware and software to perform fully measured as a percentage of the total estimated
analytical aero-triangulation, analytical stereoplotter effort. g. Volume of DoD contract awards in the
instrumentation interfaced for digital data collection last 12 months as described in Note 24. 4.
of planimetric and topographic features, DTM, DEM SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS: See Note 24 for
data collection and manipulation of terrain data, general submission requirements. Interested firms
digital data editing facilities, ability to provide having the capabilities to perform this work must
orthophoto products (hardcopy and digital), and submit two copies of SF 255 (11/92 edition), and
airborne GPS capabilities for aircraft navigation and two copies of SF 254 (11/92 edition) for the prime
photo control. (5) technical production expertise firm and all consultants, to the above address not
consistent with utilization of photogrammetric later than the close of business on the 30th day
equipment. (6) capability to collect and deliver after the date of this announcement. If the 30th day
digital data (2D and 3D) properly formatted on is a Saturday, Sunday, or Federal holiday, the
appropriate media. (7) ability to acquire and utilize deadline is the close of business of the next
remotely sensed data to incorporate into existing business day. Include the firm's ACASS number in
mapping data bases and/or generate thematic maps. SF 255, Block 3b. For ACASS information, call
(8) facilities and capability to gather historical 503-808-4590. In SF 255, Block 10 describe
photos from hardcopy and/or digital sources and owned or leased equipment that will be used to
perform photo image interpretation to detect land perform this contract, as well as CADD capabilities.
use and change analysis utilizing digital softcopy In Block 10 also indicate the estimated percentage
techniques and manually via hardcopy. (9) involvement of each firm on the proposed team.
contractor facilities must have capability to deliver Solicitation packages are not provided.
digital data on CDROM, optical rewritable disks,
8mm tapes, magnetic 9-track computer tapes, and
3.5" micro disks. Digital data must be readable and
fully operational with U.S. Geological Survey DLG-
GRASS and Intergraph system formats. (10) Own
or lease static/kinematic GPS equipment capable of
subcentimeter measurement accuracy, electronic
total station with data collector, and CADD/GIS
data processing equipment. b. Qualified personnel
in the following key disciplines: (1) Licensed civil
engineers. (2) Registered land surveyors. (3)
Engineering, surveying, CADD and photogrammetric
technicians. The evaluation will consider education,
training, registration, voluntary certifications (e.g.,
ACSM Certified Hydrographer or ASPRS Certified

EP 715-1-7
31 May 99


1. Introduction. ACASS is an automated (2) DFARS 236.602-1(a)(6)(A) requires that

database of A-E qualifications, DoD A-E contract the volume of work awarded by DoD in the
awards, and A-E performance evaluations. It is previous 12 months be considered in A-E selections
maintained and operated by the Contractor and that this data be obtained from ACASS.
Appraisal Information Center (herein referred to
simply as the Center) with the Contracting Division (3) DFARS 236.604(c)(i) requires that all
of the Portland District. ACASS is primarily used DoD agencies forward A-E performance evaluations
by DoD agencies, but other Federal agencies may to ACASS.
transmit evaluations to ACASS and access
information in ACASS. 3. Description. ACASS has three parts:

2. Regulatory Basis. a. Part I, A-E Qualifications. This part

contains data from SFs 254, with the exception of
a. ACASS fulfills the following FAR block 11 (Project Examples, Last 5 Years). SFs
requirements, thereby eliminating this responsibility 254 are submitted directly to the Center by A-E
for individual offices: firms and by contracting offices when received
from firms. The data is entered into the database
(1) FAR 36.603 (a) and (b) to maintain SF by the Center. A copy of the data as entered is
254 files on firms wishing to be considered for sent to the firm for verification. If 13 months have
Government contracts. elapsed since a firm has updated its SF 254, the
Center sends a reminder letter. If a response is not
(2) FAR 36.603(c) to classify each firm with received within 3 months, the firm's SF 254 data is
respect to location, specialized experience, removed from ACASS. However, the firm's name,
professional capabilities and capacity. address and identification number are retained for
6 years, or longer if any records relating to the firm
(3) FAR 36.603(d)(1) to encourage firms to are in Parts II or III of ACASS.
update their SF 254 annually.
b. Part II, DoD A-E Contract Award Data.
(4) FAR 36.603(d)(3) to maintain records on This data is obtained electronically from the
contract awards in the past year. Defense Contract Action Data System (DCADS;
DFARS 204.670-2 and 3) and is updated monthly.
(5) FAR 36.603(d)(4) to maintain Contract award data is retained for 3 years after
performance evaluation files. (The original copy of receipt from DCADS.
all performance evaluations must still be maintained
in the official contract file). c. Part III, Performance Evaluations of A-E
Contractors. Performance evaluations are
(6) FAR 36.604(c) to distribute performance transmitted electronically from contracting activities
evaluations to all contracting offices. to the Center using a special software program. An
evaluation is retained in ACASS for 6 years after
b. ACASS use is directed by the DFARS as the date of the reviewing official's signature in
follows: accordance with FAR 36.604(c).

(1) DFARS 236.602-1(a)(4) directs that A-E 4. Usage.

evaluation boards use performance evaluations from
ACASS. (ACASS is not referred to by name in the a. Instructions. The Center issues
DFARS but as the central database operated by the instructions on accessing and using ACASS.
U.S. Army Engineer Division, North Pacific. The
Center has since been transferred to the Portland b. Interactive Procedures. Obtaining
District.) information from ACASS is performed by answering

EP 715-1-7
31 May 99

a series of interactive questions. Data on specific c. Reports. Several reports are available
firms are retrieved by means of firm identification from ACASS. These reports are for various sorts of
numbers assigned by the Center. If a number is not contract award data, including awards to SB and
known, it can be found by means of an interactive SDB firms, and for summaries of performance
search procedure available from the ACASS main evaluations by office. The latter is useful for offices
menu. The primary types of information obtainable to verify that evaluations have been prepared and
from ACASS are: transmitted to ACASS.

(1) SFs 254, DoD contract award data, and d. Access and Release of Information.
performance evaluations can be retrieved for ACASS access and use shall be limited to Federal
specific firms (maximum of 40 in one batch run). Government agencies only. SF 254 data and
Evaluations may be retrieved in the form of a one performance evaluations shall be released only to
line summary for each evaluation for a quick the respective firm and Government contracting
overview in lieu of a full report. Evaluations may be offices having a bona fide need for this data.
retrieved for a firm by either contract number or
date range. e. Assistance. USACE offices may contact
the Center for assistance, as follows:
(2) A set of criteria based on SF 254 data
can be queried to find firms with desired U.S. Army Engineer District, Portland
qualifications. This satisfies the requirement of FAR ATTN: CENWP-CT-I
36.603(c) for classification of firms. P.O. Box 2946
Portland, Oregon 97208-2946
(3) A list of firms (maximum of 40 in one Telephone: 503-808-4590 or 4591
batch run) can be compared to a set of criteria to Facsimile: 503-808-4596
determine which firms meet the criteria.

EP 715-1-7
31 May 99


1. Authorization. The advance selection of A-E district to issue a synopsis. The synopsis will
firms for a specific type of work is authorized by indicate that none of the projects are yet authorized
EFARS 36.602(S-100). This appendix provides and that funds are not presently available for any
implementing procedures. contracts (see FAR 32.703-2(a) and 32.705-1(a)
and the clause at 52.232-18). An example
2. Applicability. synopsis is enclosed.

a. If two or more A-E contracts for the same 4. Selection.

type of work are reasonably anticipated in a given
period in a particular geographic area, a single a. For a MSC-wide synopsis, all concerned
synopsis and selection process covering that districts should participate in the preselection (if
particular type of work may be conducted prior to held) and selection boards. Using agency
receiving specific authorization for any work of that participation is not required.
type. The contracts must have similar requirements
such that generally the same firms would have been b. The selection process will proceed
interested and selected if the contracts were through the approval of a ranked list of most highly
synopsized and selected individually. This process qualified firms. All of the selected firms must be
does not apply to ID contracts. technically equal and most highly qualified, based
on the primary selection criteria. The ranking of the
b. This process is appropriate for the design selected firms must be based only on the secondary
of a specific type of construction project (such as selection criteria1. The number of selected firms
barracks, Army Reserve Centers, airport runways, may be more or less than the anticipated number of
utility monitoring and control systems, family contracts, but at least three firms must be deemed
housing upgrades, flood protection structures, or technically equal and most highly qualified.
shoreline erosion prevention), specific types of Otherwise, the synopsis must be canceled and
engineering or architectural services (such as regular selection procedures used.
seismic studies, asbestos surveys, interior
architectural renovations, or real property master c. A selection based on a district-wide
planning), or topographic or hydrographic surveying synopsis must be approved by the MSC if the price
and mapping services. If one or more of the of any contract resulting from the synopsis is
anticipated projects have unique requirements such estimated to exceed the districts delegated
as special seismic, geologic, or environmental selection authority. A selection based on a MSC-
conditions, this procedure is not appropriate for wide synopsis must be approved by the MSC. The
those unique projects. Specific unique projects can selected firms will be notified of their ranking. The
be cited as being excluded in the synopsis and selected list of firms must be used for all work of
separate synopses issued for those projects. the designated type during the period stated in the
public announcement. Separate synopses for
c. This method may either may applied on a
district or MSC basis. If applied on a MSC basis,
the MSC will select a lead district to issue the CBD 1
The Brooks Act requires that negotiation
synopsis and coordinate the A-E evaluation begin with the highest qualified firm. Hence, all of
board(s). the selected firms must be equally (and highest)
qualified in order that negotiation of the second and
3. Synopsis. A brief, written justification will be subsequent contracts may begin with other than
prepared by the Chief, Engineering Division and the first firm on the selection list. The highest
approved by the Chief, Contracting Division prior to qualified firms are determined by application of the
issuing a district-wide synopsis. Similarly for a primary selection criteria which considers technical
MSC-wide synopsis, a justification will be prepared capabilities. Their ranking is then determined by
by the Director of Engineering, approved by the the secondary selection criteria, which are
Director of Contracting, and provided to the lead socioeconomic, and not technical, in nature.

EP 715-1-7
31 May 99

specific contracts for this type of work shall not be with the next ranked firm that has not been offered
issued later unless specifically identified as excluded a contract for negotiation. If the list of ranked firms
in the generic synopsis. is exhausted, the negotiation cycle shall begin again
with the top ranked firm. If a selection is MSC-
5. Negotiation and Award. When the first wide, the MSC will control the approved list of
contract for the designated type of work is ranked firms. When a district is authorized to
authorized, the top ranked firm will be issued a perform a project, they will advise the MSC and be
request for price proposal and negotiations initiated. assigned the next firm for negotiation. Contracts
When a subsequent contract is authorized or when resulting from an advance selection process may be
negotiations on a previously authorized contract awarded for a period of up to one year after the
have not been successful, negotiations shall begin date of selection approval.

EP 715-1-7
31 May 99


selected to negotiate a contract estimated to
C Architect and Engineering Services -Construction exceed $500,000, it must comply with FAR
52.219-9 regarding the requirement for a small
US Army Corps of Engineers, Ft. Worth business (SB) and small disadvantaged business
District, P.O. Box 17300, ATTN: CESWF-ED- (SDB) subcontracting plan on that portion of the
MS, Room 705, 819 Taylor Street, Ft. Worth, work it intends to subcontract. The subcontracting
TX 76102-0300 goals for the Fort Worth District which will be
C- DESIGN OF VEHICLE MAINTENANCE SHOPS IN considered in the negotiation of this contract are:
AR, LA, NM, OK & TX. POC John Smith, (817)334- (1) at least 61.2% of a contractor's intended
1234. 1. CONTRACT INFORMATION: a. Nature of subcontract amount be placed with small
Work: A-E services are expected to be required for businesses (SB), including small disadvantaged
the design of approximately four Army and Air businesses (SDB) and women-owned small
Force vehicle maintenance shops in the businesses (WOSB); (2) at least 9.1% of a
Southwestern Division (Ft. Worth and Tulsa contractor's intended subcontract amount be placed
Districts) of the Corps of Engineers (AR, LA, NM, with SDB; and, (3) at least 4.5% of a contractor's
OK & TX). A-E services may include site intended subcontract amount be placed with
investigation, planning, engineering studies, WOSB. The plan is not required with this submittal.
concept design, final design (option), and To be eligible for contract award, a firm must be
construction phase engineering support (option). registered in the DoD Central Contractor
The A-E contracts will be awarded between Oct 98 Registration (CCR). Register via the CCR Internet
and Sep 99. Concept designs will usually be site at http://ccr.edi.disa.mil or by contacting the
completed within 3-6 months of contract award and DoD Electronic Commerce Information Center at 1-
final design completed within 6-9 months of 800-334-3414. 2. PROJECT INFORMATION:
concept design approval. b. Contract Award Vehicle maintenance shops ranging from 25,000 to
Procedure: This will be the only announcement for 150,000 sq ft. Facilities typically include traveling
the design of vehicle maintenance shops in the bridge cranes, vehicle and industrial exhaust
Southwestern Division during the next 12 months, systems, fuel dispensing, battery charging, arms
except for a maintenance shop at Ft. Hood which room with intrusion detection system (power
will be announced and selected separately due to conduit rough-in only), fire protection systems, oil-
special site conditions. A separate firm-fixed-price water separators, and waste oil disposal system.
contract will be negotiated and awarded for each Supporting facilities typically include water, sewer,
project. A list of at least three most highly qualified natural gas, HVAC, electric service, security
and technically equal firms will be selected using lighting, parking, storm drainage, and information
the primary criteria listed below. If there are not at systems. The estimated construction costs range
least three most highly qualified and technically from $1,000,000 to $10,000,000. 3. SELECTION
equal firms, the synopsis will be canceled. The CRITERIA: See Note 24 for a general description of
firms will be ranked for order of negotiation using the A-E selection process. The selection criteria for
the secondary criteria listed below. When a this particular project in descending order of
directive for the first project of this type is received, importance (first by major criterion and then by
negotiations shall begin with the top ranked firm. each sub-criterion) are listed below. Criteria a-e are
When a directive is received for a subsequent primary. Criteria f and g are secondary and will only
project, or if negotiations with a firm for a project be used as a tie-breaker among technically equal
are unsuccessful, negotiations shall begin with the firms. a. Specialized experience and technical
next ranked firm that has not been offered a competence in: (1) Design of vehicle maintenance
contract for negotiation. If the list of ranked firms shops. (2) Fire protection design for maintenance
is exhausted, the negotiation cycle shall begin again shops. (3) Design of waste oil collection and
with the top ranked firm. None of the projects have disposal systems. (4) Design of fuel dispensing
been authorized for design and funds are not facilities. (5) Energy conservation and use of
presently available for any contracts (see FAR recovered materials. (6) Construction cost
52.232-18). This announcement is open to all estimating, and preparation of estimates on IBM-
businesses regardless of size. If a large business is compatible personal computers using Corps of

EP 715-1-7
31 May 99

Engineers' Computer Aided Cost Estimating System of business of the next business day. Include the
(M-CACES) (software provided by USACE) or firm's ACASS number in SF 255, Block 3b. For
similar software. (7) Producing CADD drawings. (8) ACASS information, call 503-326-3459. In Block
Producing quality designs based on evaluation of a 10 of the SF 255 describe the firm's overall DQMP,
firm's design quality management plan (DQMP). including management approach, coordination of
The evaluation will consider the management disciplines and subcontractors, and quality control
approach, coordination of disciplines and procedures. A project-specific design quality control
subcontractors, quality control procedures, and plan must be prepared and approved by the
prior experience of the prime firm and any Government as a condition of contract award, but
significant subcontractors on similar projects. b. is not required with this submittal. In Block 10 also
Qualified registered professional personnel in the indicate the estimated percentage involvement of
following key disciplines: project management each firm on the proposed team. Solicitation
(architect or engineer), architecture, fire protection packages are not provided. This is not a request for
engineering, mechanical engineering, electrical proposal.
engineering, structural engineering and civil
engineering. The lead architect or engineer in each
discipline must be registered to practice in the
appropriate professional field. The evaluation will
consider education, training, registration,
certifications, overall and relevant experience, and
longevity with the firm. c. Past performance on
DoD and other contracts with respect to cost
control, quality of work, and compliance with
performance schedules. d. Capacity to perform the
work in the required time. The evaluation will
consider the experience of the firm and any
significant consultants in similar size projects, and
the availability of an adequate number of personnel
in key disciplines. e. Experience in the design of
buildings in the general region of the Southwestern
Division.2 f. Extent of participation of SB (including
WOSB), SDB, historically black colleges and
universities, and minority institutions in the
proposed contract team, measured as a percentage
of the total estimated effort. g. Volume of DoD
contract awards in the last 12 months as described
Note 24 for general submission requirements.
Interested firms having the capabilities to perform
this work must submit two copies of SF 255
(11/92 edition), and two copies of SF 254 (11/92
edition) for the prime firm and all consultants, to
the above address not later than the close of
business on the 30th day after the date of this
announcement. If the 30th day is a Saturday,
Sunday, or Federal holiday, the deadline is the close

Do not use this criterion if the synopsis is
for a small geographic area, such as one or two
states. Instead, use knowledge of the locality
(include specific requirements) as a primary criterion
and geographic proximity as a secondary criterion.

EP 715-1-7
31 May 99


A RFPP to an A-E firm will include the SOW, task orders if the contract contains a firm pricing
proposal instructions, preproposal conference date mechanism. The certificate should not be executed
(if needed), proposal due date, name(s) and and submitted until negotiations are completed.
telephone number(s) of the Government
negotiator(s), and the contract terms and 7. Executed Representations, Certifications
conditions. An RFPP will direct the firm to submit and Other Statements of Offeror.
the following information, as appropriate, for the
contract action: 8. Detailed price breakdown with tasks,
position classifications, labor-hours, costs and profit
1. The name(s) and title(s) of the person(s) for all phases and sub-phases of work. Indicate
authorized to negotiate and sign a contract. which work will be performed by the prime firm and
each subcontractor. Identify factual and judgmental
2. The labor rates and supporting payroll items. Discuss any assumptions made in
data for all position classifications anticipated to be developing the proposal. Include price quotes for
used under the contract by the prime firm and any any commercial supplies and services.
subcontractors. Include the basis for any escalation
in labor rates. 9. Subcontracting plan for the utilization of
SB and SDB if the prime firm is a large business and
3. Financial data and the methodology used the contract is expected to exceed $500,000 (FAR
to calculate the proposed overhead rates for the 19.702(a)(1) and 19.704).
prime firm and subcontractors. Identify costs not
allowed by FAR 31.2. 10. Acknowledgment that the firm, or any
subsidiaries or affiliates, may not be awarded a
4. The name and address of any construction contract for the project to be designed
Government audit agency which has conducted an (FAR 36.209 and 36.606(c)). The firm should also
audit of the firm within the last year. be advised not to release any information to
prospective bidders for the construction contract
5. Submission of cost and pricing data for (FAR 9.505(b)).
proposals over $500,000 as required by FAR
15.403-4(a)(1), 15.403-5(b)(1) and Table 15-2 of 11. A letter from a banker, creditor, or other
15.408. appropriate financial institution confirming the
firm's business and financial reputation, integrity
6. Certificate of Current Cost or Pricing Data and ability to execute the contract.
if the negotiated price exceeds $500,000 (FAR
15.406-2). A certificate is not normally required for 12. Design quality control plan.

EP 715-1-7
31 May 99


1. General. An IGE for A-E services will be 15.404-4(c)(4)(i)(B) and 36.606(a)) will be carefully
developed from a detailed analysis of the SOW, considered when preparing an IGE. An IGE will be
assuming reasonable economy and efficiency, and clearly organized to show the elements of estimated
modern and effective methods. An IGE shall not be price, including associated overhead and profit,
based on a percentage of construction cost, subject to the 6 percent limitation, and the total of
arbitrary ceilings, the availability of funds, or any these elements of price expressed as a percentage
cost or pricing information provided by the A-E of the estimated construction cost (excluding
firm. The intent of an IGE is to determine a price contingencies, and supervision and administration).
for the required work which is fair and reasonable For additional work or redesigned work, the
to the Government (Comptroller General decision estimated construction cost will be increased by the
Dworsky Associates, B-248216, June 18, 1992, value of the additional or redesigned work (DFARS
92-1 CPD 533). 236.606-70(b)).

2. Preparation. An IGE will be prepared by 6. Labor and Overhead Rates.

engineers, architects, and/or other appropriate
personnel having expertise (education, training and a. FFP Contracts. An IGE for a FFP contract
professional experience) in the type of work being will use labor and overhead rates representative of
contracted. Where available, cost and pricing the class of A-E firms that have been selected as
specialists or auditors should be consulted for most highly qualified to perform the required work
information on overhead, labor rates, and other (EFARS 36.605(a)). Class includes such factors as
pertinent unit costs and prices. The Tri-Service firm size, market area, specialization, and
CADD/GIS Technology Center Technical Report capabilities1. Appendix T lists sources of
CADD-96-1 provides very useful guidance on information on labor and overhead costs in the A-E
estimating the cost of CADD services. An IGE will industry. Rates for the Government or the firm
be marked "FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY" and under negotiation will not be used since the
protected accordingly. objective of an IGE is to independently estimate a
fair price for a competitive and efficient private firm,
3. Approval. An IGE will be approved by a not the Government nor the firm under negotiation,
supervisor having expertise in the type of work to perform the required A-E services. Arbitrary
being contracted. The level of supervisory approval limits on the overhead and labor rates used in an
will be appropriate for the complexity and dollar IGE are prohibited.
value of the contract action. An IGE will be
approved prior to opening the related A-E price b. ID Contracts. An IGE for an IDC will
proposal. Internal management controls will be consist of an independent analysis of fair and
established to ensure that each IGE is prepared reasonable rates for labor, overhead and other
independently of the A-E proposal. costs. An IGE for a task order will use the contract
rates for labor, overhead, travel, supplies, services,
4. Revision. An IGE should be revised whenever and possibly profit (if the same profit rate is
there is a significant change in the SOW or a applicable to all orders).
significant error or omission is discovered in the
IGE. A revised IGE should normally be approved by 7. Breakdown of Costs. An IGE will be
the same person who approved the original IGE.
Revision of an IGE is not required to justify
accepting a proposal greater than the IGE if the 1
For example, for a major military command
significant differences are adequately explained in
headquarters, the IGE would likely use labor and
the PNM.
overhead rates representative of national, "top
100" firms. Conversely, for a standard vehicle
5. Statutory Limitation. The 6 percent statutory
maintenance building at a typical Army installation,
limitation for the "production and delivery of
the IGE would likely use rates of local, small-to-
designs, plans, drawings and specifications (FAR
medium size firms.

EP 715-1-7
31 May 99

organized to correspond to each phase or Typical travel costs include rental car, company car
sub-phase of work in the SOW. The estimated mileage, airfare, parking fees, and per diem
price for each phase or sub-phase will be itemized expenses. The labor of personnel when traveling
to show the direct labor costs, overhead costs, will be included in the direct labor portion of an IGE.
travel costs, other direct costs, and profit. The unit cost and quantity of each travel item will
be identified. Per diem and airfare costs are limited
a. Direct Labor Costs. The labor-hours by FAR 31.205-46. The prevailing privately owned
needed for each position classification (types of vehicle mileage reimbursement rate for Government
disciplines at certain levels of expertise) are personnel will be used to estimate car mileage
determined by analysis of the required tasks and costs.
products in the SOW. Reasonable effort must also
be included for project management, quality control d. Other Direct Costs. Include all other
and assurance, clerical support, and coordination necessary direct costs not included in direct labor
between disciplines. The estimated labor rates for and travel, and not ordinarily included in the
work of extended duration or for later phases of overhead of an A-E firm. Commercial quotes from
work will be adjusted for escalation. If the SCA suppliers are usually available for these items.
applies to the contract, the labor rates and benefits Typical other direct costs include: reproduction of
for service employees must be at least equal to documents for Government review, supplies,
those in the appropriate DoL wage determination. photographs, renderings, models, colorboards, long
distance communications, laboratory tests,
b. Overhead. Overhead costs (also called computer use, and postage.
indirect costs) include overhead on direct labor and
general and administrative overhead. FAR 31 e. Profit. Profit rates will be determined in
provides detailed guidance on overhead costs. An accordance with EFARS 15.973-101. The profit
IGE will normally be prepared using a single rate will be applied to all costs (direct labor,
overhead factor which combines overhead on direct overhead, travel and other direct) to estimate the
labor with general and administrative overhead, dollar amount of profit. An IGE will not be
expressed as a percentage of the total direct labor structured with redundant levels of profit (no profit
costs. This method is representative of the on profit) 2. Hence, if an IGE is structured with
accounting practices of most A-E firms and is subcontractors, the estimated costs (without profit)
compatible with the market surveys in Appendix T. for the prime contractor and the subcontractors will
Other overhead structures may be used in an IGE if be added to give the total cost base for applying
representative of the class of firms selected for the the profit rate.
work. An IGE may be prepared using separate
overhead rates for the prime contractor and primary
subcontractors if considered reasonable and typical
for the type of work.

c. T ravel. Travel requirements are

determined from analysis of the SOW for tasks
such as field investigation and meetings, based on
the location of the firm selected for negotiation.

The EFARS alternate structured approach to
the weighted guidelines method (WGM) for A-E
contracts yields profits which are substantially
greater than the WGM in DFARS 215.404-71.
Hence, estimating additional profit for layering of
subcontractors is not warranted.

EP 715-1-7
31 May 99


The following sources of cost information can Publication: Engineers Salaries Survey
be used in preparing IGE for A-E services and
evaluating A-E price proposals. Contents: Detailed data on salaries for engineers
for various disciplines, education levels, lengths of
Publication: PSMJ Financial Statistics Survey - experience, levels of responsibility, and locations.
Exclusively for Design Firms
Publisher: D. Dietrich Associates, Inc., Box 511,
Contents: Overhead rates (overall and elements) Phoenixville, PA 19640; Phone: 610-935-1563 or
for various sizes, types and locations of firms. 800-654-8528.
Also, data on profit, staffing, labor costs, and
automation use and costs. Note: This firm also publishes other similar surveys
on engineering executives, architectural positions,
Publisher: Practice Management Associates, Ltd., construction services positions, scientists, and
Ten Midland Avenue, Newton, MA 02158; Phone: laboratory technicians.
Publication: Drafting & Designer Salaries
Note: This firm also publishes two other useful
yearly surveys: Design Services Fee Structure Contents: Detailed data on salaries for different
Survey, and CADD Application and User Survey. levels of CADD operators, drafters and designers in
various regions.
Publication: Income & Salary Survey
Publisher: D. Dietrich Associates, Inc. (see above
Contents: Detailed data on salaries for engineers information)
for various disciplines, education levels, lengths of
experience, levels of responsibility, and locations. Publication: Compensation and Benefits in
Consulting Engineering Firms
Publisher: National Society of Professional
Engineers, P.O. Box 96163, Washington, D.C. Contents: Salary and benefit data on 41
20090-6163; Phone: 703-684-2882 engineering positions, such as managers, drafters,
technicians, and surveyors.
Publication: Compensation of U.S. Architecture
Firms Publisher: Abbott Langer & Associates, 548 First
Street, Crete, IL 60417; Phone: 708-672-4200.
Contents: Average salaries for architects for
various levels of responsibility, sizes of firms, and Publication: FMG Salary Survey
regions. Also includes similar data for landscape
architects, interior designers, drafters and CADD Contents: Salary data for architects, engineers and
operators. designers.

Publisher: American Institute of Architects, 1735 Publisher: Financial Managers Group, 425 Wilshire
New York Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20006, Boulevard, Oklahoma City, OK 73116; Phone: 405-
Phone: 800-365-ARCH 848-1111.

EP 715-1-7
31 May 99


1. General. Technical, price and cost analysis contractor. Ensure that all subcontractors have
will generally be performed on every A-E price been approved by the selection board (FAR
proposal. The extent of the analysis and 36.606(e)).
documentation depends on the dollar value and
complexity of the proposal. For small actions h. Evaluating the need for and suitability of
(typically below the IGE threshold of $100,000), proposed special equipment and the hours of
the proposal analysis can be efficiently performed special equipment usage compared to the labor
by annotating the A-E proposal. hours for using the equipment.

2. Technical Analysis (FAR 15.404-1(e)). i. Reviewing the purpose and number of

Technical analysis is the evaluation of the proposed trips, personnel traveling, origin and
judgmental elements of a proposal and the destination, and means.
approach for accomplishing the work. Technical
analysis involves comparing the proposal with the j. Reviewing the type and amount of
IGE, and: communications, postage, reproduction, materials
and other direct costs.
a. Evaluating the general approach for
performing the work and any assumptions included 3. Price Analysis (FAR 15.404-1(b)). Price
in the proposal. Ensure that the proposal includes analysis is the evaluation of the proposed total
appropriate modern and cost-effective design price, and the price of major phases or elements of
methods (FAR 36.606(d)) and is based on work, without evaluating individual cost elements or
reasonable efficiency and economy (FAR 15.404- profit. Price analysis includes, as appropriate,
1(e)). comparing the proposed price(s) to other similar
contract actions, the IGE, and rough unit price
b. Ensuring that all requirements in the SOW yardsticks, such as dollars per drawing for designs
are addressed, and no unnecessary items are or dollars per acre for surveying and mapping.
4. Cost Analysis (FAR 15.404-1(c)). Cost
c. Evaluating the design quality control plan, analysis is the review and evaluation of the
if required, to ensure that the firm is using separate cost elements and proposed profit to
procedures, practices and tools that will produce determine what the price of the contract should be,
quality engineering and design services and "assuming reasonable efficiency and economy."
products in accordance with ER 1110-1-12. Also, the analysis "shall ensure that the effects of
inefficient or uneconomical past practices are not
d. Ensuring that all Government-provided projected into the future." Cost analysis includes
information and materials are considered in the (items a -l are appropriate for audit review):
a. Verifying labor rates, employee benefits
e. Evaluating the need for the proposed and escalation factors, and evaluating their
position classifications (types of disciplines with reasonableness.
certain levels of expertise) and their mixture.
Consider the relationship among management, b. Verifying the direct labor base.
professional, technician and drafting hours.
c. Evaluating the reasonableness of the
f. Evaluating the number of labor hours for method for computing overhead rates. When a
each position classification for various tasks, significant amount of the work is to be performed
products and/or phases of work. away from a firm's office, such as resident on-site
construction support, overhead rates applied to that
g. Evaluating proposed subcontracting and portion of the work should be evaluated separately.
how it interrelates with work done by the prime

EP 715-1-7
31 May 99

d. Reviewing for any duplication between l. Verifying mathematical accuracy.

direct costs and overhead costs for items such as
principals and managers, administrative personnel, m. Verifying that contract rates for the prime
travel, communications, reproduction, computer and subcontractors are being used for a task order
services, equipment, materials and supplies. under an ID contract.

e. Evaluating the reasonableness of travel n. Verifying that labor rates for service
costs and other direct costs such as reproduction, employees (FAR 22.10) are at least equal to the
computer services, laboratory tests, materials and WD by the DoL under the SCA, if the SCA is
supplies, using price quotes, catalog prices, other applicable to the contract.
recent contracts, and other available data.
o. Comparing costs with other similar
f. Determining the allowability of direct contracts and the IGE.
costs and overhead costs in accordance with FAR
31.205. p. Comparing the proposed profit amount
with the profit amount determined by the Alternate
g. Determining the allocability of costs to Structured Approach to the Weighted Guidelines
the contract action for other offices of the firm. Method (EFARS 15.973-101).

h. Evaluating the rate for facilities capital q. Determining that all necessary cost or
cost of money. pricing data has been submitted by the firm.

i. Evaluating the percentage of Government r. Evaluating the extension of the allowable

business compared to total business, and the unit costs (such as labor rates, overhead rates,
impact of the contract action on overhead rates. travel rates, printing costs) to total prices,
considering the results of the technical analysis of
j. Verifying conformance with Cost the judgmental elements (such as labor hours, trips,
Accounting Standards (FAR 30) or generally and number of drawings).
accepted accounting practices.
s. Evaluating compliance with the 6 percent
k. Identifying and evaluating the necessity statutory limitation (DFARS 236.606-70).
and reasonableness of any contingencies (FAR
15.402(c) and 15.404-1(c)(2)(i)(A)).

EP 715-1-7
31 May 99


Instructions are provided below for items which are not self-explanatory.

Item 3a. PHASE OF COMPLETION. Check the "interim" box for any performance evaluation made prior
to completion of the design or engineering services phase, or construction phase, and enter the
percent of completion of the phase. The usual instances for interim evaluations are: (1) when
performance is marginal or unsatisfactory; (2) annual progress evaluations when the
performance period exceeds 18 months; or (3) a project is deferred for more than 3 months and
substantial work has been completed. Check "Final" if the evaluation is made at the completion
of a project phase (i.e., design or engineering services phase, or construction phase).

Item 3b. COMPLETION. Check "Design" if the A-E services are for design of construction. Check
"Engineering Services" if the A-E services are not directly associated with the design of a
construction project. Check "Construction" for the evaluation of A-E services during

Item 5. DELIVERY ORDER NUMBER(S). Only applicable for ID contracts. (The correct term on the form
should be task order which applies to services, not delivery order which applies to

Item 6. NAME AND ADDRESS OF A-E CONTRACTOR. Show primary performing office, which may not
be the office which signed the contract.

Item 7b. DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT. For HTRW projects, indicate the phase in which the A-E firm
assumed responsibility for the project.

8a is shown below:

Engineering Division
Savannah District
Savannah, GA

Item 9a. TYPE OF WORK PERFORMED BY A-E (DESIGN, STUDY, ETC.). For HTRW projects, indicate
if performance type specifications were required.

Item 9d. PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTRACT. The initial A-E fee should include the basic contract
or task order amount plus any options awarded before the time of the evaluation. Do not
include contract or task order modifications in the initial fee amount. A-E contract
modifications should include all additional work not negotiated at the time of the contract or
task order award. The total A-E fee is the sum of the initial fee and the modifications.

either negotiated/actual completion dates or number of days, not both. Include authorized
contract extensions. The "number of days" is the total period negotiated for performance of
the work and does not include Government review time, other design stop periods, or other
Government-caused delays.

EP 715-1-7
31 May 99

Item 11. A-E LIABILITY. Indicate status of A-E liability at time of completing the form. Check "NONE"
if there are no known deficiencies, or if there are and the KO has decided not to take action.
Check UNDETERMINED if there are deficiencies and a determination on liability has not been
made. Discuss in Item 20. Check "PENDING" if the contracting officer has determined that
action will be taken to recover damages from the A-E firm and enter the amount of damages.
Check "SETTLEMENT" if a liability case(s) against the A-E has been settled and enter the
amount recovered. UNDETERMINED, "PENDING", and "SETTLEMENT" may be concurrently

Item 12. OVERALL RATING. See guidance in Chapter 6, paragraph 6.4.e of this pamphlet. The overall
rating shall be determined through an assessment of ratings of performance elements in Items
16 through 19, and any other significant factors not covered by the performance elements.
Explain in Item 20 which disciplines and attributes are significant if not readily apparent from
the nature of the work.

Item 14a. NAME, TITLE AND OFFICE OF RATING OFFICIAL. For the evaluation at the completion of
design or engineering services, indicate the COR. For the evaluation at the completion of
construction, indicate the Area Engineer or Resident Engineer. Give the name of the office, not
just the office symbol.

Item 15. NAME, TITLE AND OFFICE OF REVIEWING OFFICIAL. The Director/Chief, or Assistant
Director/Chief, of Engineering.

Item 19. CONSTRUCTION PHASE. The RE is responsible for addressing these attributes. Any aspect
of A-E performance not adequately described by the ratings given in the matrix shall be
described in Item 20. Examples of items that might require special comment are:

- Field visit support. Did the A-E firm provide the proper individual in a timely manner?
Were written reports submitted in a timely manner? Did solutions to problems appear to be
cost effective? Did the A-E firm provide information which contributed to the Governments
defense against a claim or identification of a construction contractor deficiency?

- Changes. Did the A-E firm provide designs to correct errors or omissions and/or revise
criteria in a timely manner? Were the cost estimates useful/realistic in support of negotiations?

- As-Built Drawings and Operation and Maintenance Manuals. Comment on the adequacy
of the A-E firms preparation or review of such documents, if applicable.

Item 20. REMARKS. The comments should be tailored to be of maximum usefulness to selection boards
considering this A-E firm for future work, and to the administrators of contracts with this firm
in the future. If the effectiveness of the firm's project management is not adequately covered
by Items 17 and 19, add comments as needed. Provide substantive comments to support a
marginal or unsatisfactory evaluation and include any comments by the A-E firm in
response to the proposed evaluation. Explain the basis for a No or Conditionally
recommendation for future contracts in Item 13.

EP 715-1-7
31 May 99


A -E (2)









EP 715-1-7
31 May 99


1. General. Detailed and accurate cost records 3. Ancillary Costs. Include costs such as:
are very important when seeking recovery of A-E
liability damages. Damage computations must a. Construction S&A costs associated with
show the source of the data and be signed and the additional construction costs, in the usual
dated by the preparer. Government labor costs percentage of construction costs.
must be determined in accordance with normal
accounting practices. The computation of damages b. Administrative costs to prepare and
should be amended as required. Damages will be award a purchase order or contract if necessary for
categorized as construction costs, ancillary costs, the remedial construction.
and investigation and recovery costs, as discussed
below. c. In-house costs for the corrective design.

2. Construction Costs. d. Cost of re-procurement of A-E services,

including the associated administrative costs.
a. Identifiable costs in a construction change
(usually executed by a contract modification, but e. Diminished Value. In some instances it is
may be a new contract, supplemental agreement, impracticable to remedy an A-E firm's error or
purchase order or other type instrument) that would deficiency. If so, the damage is the difference in
not have been included in the construction contract value of the facility as it exists and what its value
price had the design been correct. Such costs would have been had the error or deficiency not
include: tearout and demolition, scrap material, occurred.
restocking charges, premium for expedited delivery,
reinstallation, difference in new and salvage value 4. Investigation and Recovery Costs. Technical
of unused or removed material or equipment, delay and administrative costs to investigate, document,
and impact, and extended overhead. and review liability, and recover the damages,
including actions by the AERC, technical specialists,
b. Do not include construction costs that are and expert witnesses.
"value added," that is, items or work that should
have been included in the design but were omitted
or improper due to the A-E firm's error or omission.
The Government is entitled to only the extra costs
associated with including such omitted or improper
items or work in the construction and not the actual
construction costs of the items or work themselves,
unless it can be shown that the costs are more than
they would have been had the items or work been
included in the original construction specification.

EP 715-1-7
31 May 99


1. Collection of Claims. 2. Settlement Options.

a. The provisions of FAR 32.6, Contract a. Settlements can be made by cash

Debts, and its supplements, apply to claims by the payment, installment payments, or in-kind A-E
Government against A-E firms. These regulations services in some instances. The in-kind A-E
arise from the Debt Collection Act of 1982. services should be within the scope of the contract
under which the liability action has been taken, but
b. A claim for payment of damages made in obviously can not be for corrective design. The
a demand letter to an A-E firm is not subject to the value of settlements made by other than cash
provisions of FAR 32.6 until a COD has been payments shall be estimated and be reported as the
issued. When a COD is issued, the amount of the settlement amount in reports.
claim becomes a "receivable" and the handling of it
shall be in accordance with the acquisition b. Installment settlements shall be reported
regulations. A copy of the COD shall be furnished as follows:
to the local finance and accounting officer (FAO),
with the following information: (1) The case shall be reported as settled
upon receipt of the first payment.
(1) A-E firm's billing address, if different from
the mailing address; (2) Subsequent payments will increase the
amount of recoveries reported, but not the number
(2) A-E firm's employer identification number, of cases reported as settled.
if a U.S. Army contractor;
(3) An ENG Form 4858A-R is required for
(3) Social security number of A-E firm's each quarterly report until payment has been
contracting officer; received in full.

(4) Contract number; and, (4) If the firm fails to complete payment, the
case shall be referred to Counsel for collection.
(5) Government KO's name and organization.
3. Disposition of Monies Recovered.
c. The A-E firm shall be notified in the COD
that it may submit a request for deferment of a. The AERC shall provide written guidance
collection (FAR 32.610(a)(3)). This is pertinent if to the FAO for disposition of monies collected in
the A-E firm has not been paid in full for the liability case settlements. A copy of the disposition
contract under which the liability action is being document shall be placed in the A-E contract file.
taken or has other active contracts, as the KO has
authority to set off the claim against payments due b. In general, the monies recovered in A-E
the A-E firm. Requests for deferment by the A-E liability actions are credited to the appropriation or
firm and the granting of deferments by the KO are account that bore the costs. This applies to project
covered in FAR 32.613. accounts, flat rate S&A accounts, and general and
administrative overhead accounts. The amounts
d. The FAO shall be kept informed of the credited to these accounts cannot exceed the
status of the resolution of a liability case and charges against them for the liability case.
provided copies on all internal and external
correspondence concerning the status of the claim. c. In the cases where the costs associated
The AERC shall support and coordinate the actions with a liability case were borne by a customer's
of the KO and FAO to comply with the regulations operations and maintenance account, the funds
cited above. recovered shall be returned to the client without

EP 715-1-7
31 May 99

regard to whether the return is made in the same d. When the monies received cannot be
year as the costs were incurred. credited to an account because the appropriation
has expired, they shall be returned to the Treasury
of the United States as miscellaneous receipts.

EP 715-1-7
31 May 99


ENG Form 4858-R, Annual A-E Responsibility - Click on Information.

Management Program Report (Figure Z-1), and ENG - Click on F in alphabetic list of information
Form 4858A-R, Quarterly A-E Liability Case Report links.
(Figure Z-2) are used for AERMP reporting. The - Click on Forms Library.
instructions are shown on the reverse of each form. - Click on PerFORM Pro Plus.
These forms are locally reproducible. Also, the - Click on e4858r.frs or e4858a-r.frs.
forms can be downloaded via the Internet as - Click on Save to save to hard drive of
follows: personal computer.
- Open and complete form using FormFlow
- Access USACE home page software.

EP 715-1-7
31 May 99


EP 715-1-7
31 May 99


General: This form is used to consolidate information from individual ENG Forms 4858A-R on A-E liability cases in an operating command.
This report is submitted annually from operating commands to their MSCs, from MSCs to HQUSACE, ATTN: CEMP-EC. Instructions are
provided below for items which are not self-explanatory. Attach additional sheets for remarks if needed.

1. Enter the three character office symbol; e.g., NWO for Omaha District.

5b./6b. Investigation and recovery costs are for cumulative total for the cases, not just for the year. Total damages includes the
investigation and recovery costs.

(Reverse of ENG FORM 4858-R) 2

EP 715-1-7
31 May 99


EP 715-1-7
31 May 99


General: A separate form is required for each A-E liability case until it is dropped or settled. Instructions are provided below for items
which are not self-explanatory. Attach additional sheets if needed.

1. Enter the three character office symbol; e.g., NWO for Omaha District.

2. Use the following format for the case number: FY-XXX, where FY is the fiscal year in which the liability case was originated and XXX
is a serial number assigned sequentially for that fiscal year.

9. Identify key consultants by name, and city and state address, if involved.

11. Indicate date(s) and means (T=telephone; L=letter) of initial notification to the A-E firm.

15/16. Enter date and docket number of appeal to Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals (ASBCA), Engineer Board of Contract
Appeals (EBCA), or Court of Federal Claims (CFC).

Note for Items 18-22: See EP 715-1-7, Appendix X for a detailed discussion of the determination of damages. Update damages, especially
investigation and recovery costs, as the case progresses. Round-off to nearest dollar.

18. Enter the additional construction costs the Government incurred due to A-E design errors or omissions, or performance deficiencies,
such as tearout, reinstallation, premium for expedited delivery, and delay and extended overhead.

19. Enter the S&A costs associated with the additional construction costs. Also include costs for redesign (if not performed by the original
A-E firm), reprocurement of equipment or construction, and lessened value.

20. Enter all costs to investigate the A-E liability and responsibility, and to pursue the recovery of damages. Do not include labor costs
of personnel who normally charge to overhead.

25. Summarize key events in the case.

a. This should generally be a one line entry for each event, e.g.:

o 16 Apr 98: A-E rebuttal

o 6 Jun 98: Conference with A-E
o 1 Aug 98: A-E appeal to the ASBCA

Earlier entries do not have to be repeated for liability cases in the later stages of litigation.

b. Make a concise statement on the present status. For example, when the last step has been a conference with the A-E, a
statement might be made that there has been no change in the Government's position and the A-E has been told that a COD will be issued
within 30 days.

c. Give a brief statement of any changes in the case, such as the amount of damages, from the last report.

(Reverse of ENG FORM 4858A-R) 2